4.5 Article

Changes in cortical processing of pain in chronic migraine

期刊

HEADACHE
卷 45, 期 9, 页码 1208-1218

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2005.00244.x

关键词

chronic migraine; laser-evoked potentials; dipolar analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective.-The aim of this study was to perform a topographic and dipolar analysis of nociceptive-evoked responses obtained by laser stimulus under basal conditions in a cohort of chronic migraine (CM) patients, compared with migraine without aura (MWA) patients and noncraniofacial pain controls. Background.-An increased activation of cortical areas devoted to the emotional and attentive components of pain was previously found during the course of the migraine attack; it was more pronounced in patients reporting higher frequency of migraine. Methods.-Twenty-six outpatients were enrolled in the study; 16 fulfilled the criteria of CM, and 10 were affected by MWA. Fifteen noncraniofacial pain subjects were also selected. The pain stimulus was a CO2 laser pulses. The right-supraorbital zone was stimulated. Source localization analysis was performed on the most prominent laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) peak (P2) for each data set. The anatomical locations of the P2 sources were projected onto a standard normalized 3D MRI model. Results.-The CM group differed significantly from both MWA patients and controls for the x coordinate and from controls for the z coordinates. The P2 dipole localized in the rostral cingulate cortex in CM patients, lying in a more posterior location within the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) in both controls and MWA patients. The x coordinate of the P2 dipole, expressing the postero-anterior location, was significantly correlated with frequency of headache. Conclusions.-CM seems to be characterized by a distinctive pattern of cortical elaboration of pain, with a prevalent activation of the rostral portion of the ACC: our results suggest that this may be a predisposing factor to migraine chronicity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据