4.0 Article

Hypnosis and pain perception: An Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies

Journal

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-PARIS
Volume 109, Issue 4-6, Pages 165-172

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jphysparis.2016.01.001

Keywords

Hypnosis; Hypnoanalgesia; Pain perception; Functional neuroimaging; Meta-analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and objective: Several studies reported that hypnosis can modulate pain perception and tolerance by affecting cortical and subcortical activity in brain regions involved in these processes. We conducted an Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) meta-analysis on functional neuroimaging studies of pain perception under hypnosis to identify brain activation-deactivation patterns occurring during hypnotic suggestions aiming at pain reduction, including hypnotic analgesic, pleasant, or depersonalization suggestions (HASs). Databases and data treatment: We searched the PubMed, Embase and Psyclnfo databases; we included papers published in peer-reviewed journals dealing with functional neuroimaging and hypnosis modulated pain perception. The ALE meta-analysis encompassed data from 75 healthy volunteers reported in 8 functional neuroimaging studies. Results: HASs during experimentally-induced pain compared to control conditions correlated with significant activations of the right anterior cingulate cortex (Brodmann's Area [BA] 32), left superior frontal gyrus (BA 6), and right insula, and deactivation of right midline nuclei of the thalamus. Conclusions: HASs during experimental pain impact both cortical and subcortical brain activity. The anterior cingulate, left superior frontal, and right insular cortices activation increases could induce a thalamic deactivation (top-down inhibition), which may correlate with reductions in pain intensity. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available