4.7 Article

An fMRI study of cortical representation of mechanical allodynia in patients with neuropathic pain

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 63, 期 10, 页码 1838-1846

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000144177.61125.85

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To investigate cerebral activity associated with allodynia in patients with neuropathic pain. Methods: The brain responses of 27 patients with peripheral ( 5), spinal ( 3), brainstem ( 4), thalamic ( 5), lenticular ( 5), or cortical ( 5) lesions were studied with fMRI as innocuous mechanical stimuli were addressed to either the allodynic territory or the homologous contralateral region. Results: When applied to the normal side, brush and cold rubbing stimuli did not evoke pain and activated a somatosensory control network including contralateral primary ( SI) and secondary (SII) somatosensory cortices and insular regions. The same stimuli became severely painful when applied to the allodynic side and activated regions in the contralateral hemisphere that mirrored the control network, with, however, lesser activation of the SII and insular cortices. Increased activation volumes were found in contralateral SI and primary motor cortex (MI). Whereas ipsilateral responses appeared very small and restricted after control stimuli, they represented the most salient effect of allodynia and were observed mainly in the ipsilateral parietal operculum ( SII), SI, and insula. Allodynic stimuli also recruited additional responses in motor/premotor areas ( MI, supplementary motor area), in regions involved in spatial attention ( posterior parietal cortices), and in regions linking attention and motor control (mid-anterior cingulate cortex). Conclusion: On a background of deafferentation in the hemisphere contralateral to stimuli, enhanced or additional responses to innocuous stimuli in the ipsilateral hemisphere may contribute to the shift of perception from innocuous toward painful and ill-defined sensations.

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

4.7
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