ArticleJournal of pain research2024
Contact-Heat Evoked Potentials: Insights into Pain Processing in CRPS Type I.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Altered cortical alpha modulations and connectivity in complex regional pain syndrome.The journal of pain · 2026Article
- The N13 somatosensory evoked potential in complex regional pain syndrome - A potential marker for central sensitization?Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2026Article
- Beyond the Pain Management Clinic: The Role of AI-Integrated Remote Patient Monitoring in Chronic Disease Management - A Narrative Review.Journal of pain research · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the development of chronic pain in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) are diverse and involve both peripheral and central changes in pain processing, such as sensitization of the nociceptive system. The aim of this study was to objectively distinguish the specific changes occurring at both peripheral and central levels in nociceptive processing in individuals with chronic CRPS type I. Patients and Methods: Nineteen individuals with chronic CRPS type I and 16 age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HC) were recruited. All individuals underwent a clinical examination and pain assessment in the most painful limb, the contralateral limb, and a pain-free control area to distinguish between peripheral and central mechanisms. Contact-heat evoked potentials (CHEPs) were recorded after heat stimulation of the three different areas and amplitudes and latencies were analyzed. Additionally, quantitative sensory testing (QST) was performed in all three areas. Results: Compared to HC, CHEP amplitudes in CRPS were only increased after stimulation of the painful area (p=0.025), while no increases were observed for the pain-free control area (p=0.14). None of the CHEP latencies were different between the two cohorts (all p>0.23). Furthermore, individuals with CRPS showed higher pain ratings after stimulation of the painful limb compared to their contralateral limb (p=0.013). Lastly, compared to HC, mechanical (p=0.012) and thermal (p=0.046) sensitivity was higher in the painful area of the CRPS cohort. Conclusion: This study provides neurophysiological evidence supporting an intact thermo-nociceptive pathway with signs of peripheral sensitization, such as hyperexcitable primary afferent nociceptors, in individuals with CRPS type I. This is further supported by the observation of mechanical and thermal gain of sensation only in the painful limb. Additionally, the increased CHEP amplitudes might be related to fear-induced alterations of nociceptive processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.