Reorganization in secondary somatosensory cortex in chronic low back pain patients

STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional comparative study between chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients and healthy control subjects. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate reorganization in the sensory cortex by comparing cortical activity due to mechanosensory stimulation of the lumbar spine in CLBP patients versus a control group by using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LBP is now the number 1 condition across the world in terms of years living with a disability. There is growing evidence that maladaptive changes in the processing of sensory input by the central nervous system are central to understanding chronic (back) pain. METHODS: Nonpainful, posterior-anterior (PA) movement pressure was applied manually to lumbar vertebrae at L1, L3, and L5 in 13 healthy subjects and 13 CLBP patients. The manual pressure (30 N) was monitored and controlled using sensors. A randomized stimulation protocol was used consisting of 51 pressure stimuli of 5 seconds duration. fMRI data analysis was performed for the group activation within the primary and secondary sensory cortices (S1 and S2, respectively) and the representation of the individual vertebrae was extracted and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: Nonpainful PA pressure revealed no cortical reorganization in S1. In contrast, the extent of S2 activation in the CLBP group was significantly reduced in both hemispheres. In the control group, a somatotopy was identified for the lumbar vertebrae between L1 and L3, respectively, and L5 in S2 of the right hemisphere. Most importantly, a blurring of the somatotopic representation of the lumbar spine in S2 was observed in the patient group. CONCLUSION: Together, these maladaptive changes suggest a reorganization of higher-order processing for sensory information in CLBP patients that might have implications for a decreased sensory acuity, also related to body perception and subsequent altered functioning of the lumbar spine. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Adaptive changes in sensorimotor processing in patients with acute low back pain

In low back pain (LBP), primary care and secondary prevention of recurrent and persistent LBP are not always successful. Enhanced understanding of neural mechanisms of sensorimotor processing and pain modulation in patients with acute LBP is mandatory. This explorative fMRI study investigated sensorimotor processing due to mechanosensory stimulation of the lumbar spine. We studied 19 adult patients with acute LBP (< 4 weeks of an acute episode) and 23 healthy controls. On a numeric rating scale, patients reported moderate mean pain intensity of 4.5 out of 10, while LBP-associated disability indicated mild mean disability. The event-related fMRI analysis yielded no between-group differences. However, the computation of functional connectivity resulted in adaptive changes in networks involved in sensorimotor processing in the patient group: Connectivity strength was decreased in the salience and cerebellar networks but increased in the limbic and parahippocampal networks. Timewise, these results indicate that early connectivity changes might reflect adaptive physiological processes in an episode of acute LBP. These findings raise intriguing questions regarding their role in pain persistence and recurrences of LBP, particularly concerning the multiple consequences of acute LBP pain. Advanced understanding of neural mechanisms of processing non-painful mechanosensations in LBP may also improve therapeutic approaches.ISSN:2045-232

Nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic low back pain?:The low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium's international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations

The potential to classify low back pain as being characterised by dominant nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic mechanisms is a clinically relevant issue. Preliminary evidence suggests that these low back pain phenotypes might respond differently to treatments; however, more research must be done before making specific recommendations. Accordingly, the low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium was established as a group of 36 clinicians and researchers from 13 countries (five continents) and 29 institutions, to apply a modified Nominal Group Technique methodology to develop international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations to provide guidance for identifying the dominant pain phenotype in patients with low back pain, and potentially adapt pain management strategies. The BACPAP consortium's recommendations are also intended to provide direction for future clinical research by building on the established clinical criteria for neuropathic and nociplastic pain. The BACPAP consortium's consensus recommendations are a necessary early step in the process to determine if personalised pain medicine based on pain phenotypes is feasible for low back pain management. Therefore, these recommendations are not ready to be implemented in clinical practice until additional evidence is generated that is specific to these low back pain phenotypes.</p

Nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic low back pain?:The low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium's international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations

The potential to classify low back pain as being characterised by dominant nociceptive, neuropathic, or nociplastic mechanisms is a clinically relevant issue. Preliminary evidence suggests that these low back pain phenotypes might respond differently to treatments; however, more research must be done before making specific recommendations. Accordingly, the low back pain phenotyping (BACPAP) consortium was established as a group of 36 clinicians and researchers from 13 countries (five continents) and 29 institutions, to apply a modified Nominal Group Technique methodology to develop international and multidisciplinary consensus recommendations to provide guidance for identifying the dominant pain phenotype in patients with low back pain, and potentially adapt pain management strategies. The BACPAP consortium's recommendations are also intended to provide direction for future clinical research by building on the established clinical criteria for neuropathic and nociplastic pain. The BACPAP consortium's consensus recommendations are a necessary early step in the process to determine if personalised pain medicine based on pain phenotypes is feasible for low back pain management. Therefore, these recommendations are not ready to be implemented in clinical practice until additional evidence is generated that is specific to these low back pain phenotypes.</p

Contesting the BACPAP consortium's consensus – Authors' reply

peer reviewe