From Anticipation to the Experience of Pain: The Importance of Visceral Versus Somatic Pain Modality in Neural and Behavioral Responses to Pain-Predictive Cues.

Psychosom Med

From the Institute of Medical Psychology and Behavioral Immunobiology (Koenen, Icenhour, Elsenbruch), Clinic for Neurology (Forkmann, Bingel), and Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology (Theysohn, Forsting), University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany.

Published: September 2019

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to investigate how people anticipate somatic (body-related) versus visceral (internal organ-related) pain using behavioral and neural responses, particularly during an associative learning process.
  • Healthy women participated in the study while undergoing functional MRI, where they learned to associate different cues with either type of pain and reported their feelings about these cues before and after experiencing pain.
  • Results indicated that visceral pain cues were viewed as more unpleasant than somatic pain cues during the learning phase, with specific neural activations linked to attention and emotional responses; however, both types of cues returned to a neutral state after the extinction phase, showing that learning about pain cues involves both shared and unique brain mechanisms.

Article Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare behavioral and neural anticipatory responses to cues predicting either somatic or visceral pain in an associative learning paradigm.

Methods: Healthy women (N = 22) underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging. During an acquisition phase, two different visual cues repeatedly signalled either experimental visceral or somatic pain. In a subsequent extinction phase, identical cues were presented without pain. Before and after each phase, cue valence and contingency awareness were assessed on visual analog scales.

Results: Visceral compared to somatic pain-predictive cues were rated as more unpleasant after acquisition (visceral, 32.18 ± 13.03 mm; somatic, -18.36 ± 10.36 mm; p = .021) with similarly accurate cue-pain contingencies. After extinction, cue valence returned to baseline for both modalities (visceral, 1.55 ± 9.81 mm; somatic, -18.45 ± 7.12; p = .41). During acquisition, analyses of cue-induced neural responses revealed joint neural activation engaging areas associated with attention processing and cognitive control. Enhanced deactivation of posterior insula to visceral cues was observed, which correlated with enhanced responses within the salience network (anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula) during visceral compared to somatic pain stimulation. During extinction, both pain modalities induced anticipatory neural activation in the extinction and salience network (all pFWE values < .05).

Conclusions: Conditioned emotional responses to pain-predictive cues are modality specific and enhanced for the visceral modality, suggesting that pain anticipation is shaped by the salience of painful stimuli. Common but also modality-specific neural mechanisms are involved during cue-pain learning, whereas extinction of cued responses seems unaffected by modality. Future research should examine potential implications for the pathophysiology of chronic pain conditions, especially chronic visceral pain.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000612DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

somatic pain
12
pain-predictive cues
12
pain
10
visceral
10
responses pain-predictive
8
visceral pain
8
cue valence
8
visceral compared
8
compared somatic
8
neural activation
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!