362 QUANTITATIVE SENSORY TESTING AND CONTACT HEAT EVOKED POTENTIALS BEFORE AND AFTER TREATMENT IN NEUROPATHIC PAIN AFTER SPINAL CORD INJURY

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (S1) ◽  
pp. 103-103
Author(s):  
H. Kumru ◽  
D. Soler ◽  
J. Vidal ◽  
A. Pacual-Leone ◽  
J. Valls-Sole
Spinal Cord ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuelle Opsommer ◽  
Natalya Korogod ◽  
Lenka Stockinger ◽  
Gunther Landmann

Abstract Study design An experimental study. Objectives To investigate the changes in somatosensory functions using the combined application of quantitative sensory testing (QST), contact heat-evoked potentials (CHEPs) and laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) studies in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) in relation to neuropathic pain (NeP). Setting Centre for Pain Medicine, Swiss Paraplegic Centre, Nottwil, Switzerland. Methods Individuals with SCI were compared: 12 with NeP (SCI NeP) and 12 without NeP (SCI no NeP). Tools used were QST, CHEPs, LEPs and self-reported questionnaires. Tests were applied to the control (hand) and test (dermatome of altered sensation) sites, and compared to the able-bodied group. Results QST, LEPs and CHEPs assessments showed abnormalities both on the test and control sites, which did not differ between the groups with SCI. QST showed higher prevalence of allodynia in SCI NeP. CHEPs and LEPs demonstrated diminished amplitudes in both groups with SCI in comparison to able-bodied individuals. Only reaction time (RT) analysis revealed the difference of SCI NeP from the other two groups, expressed in partially preserved responses to the laser C-fibre stimulations. Conclusions Combination of assessments in our study allowed to examine spinothalamic and dorsal column functions in individuals with SCI. Changes in QST, CHEPs and LEPs were detected below the level of injury independent of NeP and at the control site indicating modifications in sensory processing rostral to the spinal lesion. Analysis of RT during laser stimulation could be an essential component when evaluating the somatosensory functions related to NeP in persons with SCI.


2002 ◽  
Vol 83 (11) ◽  
pp. 1612-1619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith C. Hayes ◽  
Dalton L. Wolfe ◽  
Jane T. Hsieh ◽  
Patrick J. Potter ◽  
Andrei Krassioukov ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 80 (10) ◽  
pp. 1258-1263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei Krassioukov ◽  
Dalton L. Wolfe ◽  
Jane T.C. Hsieh ◽  
Keith C. Hayes ◽  
Carmen E. Durham

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 340-354
Author(s):  
Radha Korupolu ◽  
Argyrios Stampas ◽  
Mani Singh ◽  
Ping Zhou ◽  
Gerard Francisco

Background: Electrophysiological measures are being increasingly utilized due to their ability to provide objective measurements with minimal bias and to detect subtle changes with quantitative data on neural function. Heterogeneous reporting of trial outcomes limits effective interstudy comparison and optimization of treatment. Objective: The objective of this systematic review is to describe the reporting of electrophysiological outcome measures in spinal cord injury (SCI) clinical trials in order to inform a subsequent consensus study. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE databases was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Adult human SCI clinical trials published in English between January 1, 2008 and September 15, 2018 with at least one electrophysiological outcome measure were eligible. Findings were reviewed by all authors to create a synthesis narrative describing each outcome measure. Results: Sixty-four SCI clinical trials were included in this review. Identified electrophysiological outcomes included electromyography activity (44%), motor evoked potentials (33%), somatosensory evoked potentials (33%), H-reflex (20%), reflex electromyography activity (11%), nerve conduction studies (9%), silent period (3%), contact heat evoked potentials (2%), and sympathetic skin response (2%). Heterogeneity was present in regard to both methods of measurement and reporting of electrophysiological outcome measures. Conclusion: This review demonstrates need for the development of a standardized reporting set for electrophysiological outcome measures. Limitations of this review include exclusion of non-English publications, studies more than 10 years old, and an inability to assess methodological quality of primary studies due to a lack of guidelines on reporting of systematic reviews of outcome measures.


2012 ◽  
Vol 123 (3) ◽  
pp. 598-604 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hatice Kumru ◽  
Dolors Soler ◽  
Joan Vidal ◽  
Josep Maria Tormos ◽  
Alvaro Pascual-Leone ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document