ArticlePloS one2024
Mechanical and thermal thresholds before and after application of a conditioning stimulus in healthy Göttingen Minipigs.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Behavioral assessment of pain in rodents: advances from evoked responses to spontaneous states and multimodal approaches.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Unravelling pain in Göttingen Minipigs undergoing experimentally induced closed-chest myocardial infarction: a prospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minipigs are widely used in biomedical research for translational studies. However, information about pain elicited by experimental procedures is lacking. Non-invasive methods as quantitative sensory testing and conditioned pain modulation are particularly attractive. Our overarching aim was to explore and refine these methods for assessing post-operative pain in minipigs after myocardial infarction. As first step, we aimed at defining mechanical and thermal thresholds in healthy adults Göttingen Minipigs, evaluating their reliability, and testing their modifications after the application of a conditioning stimulus. Thresholds were assessed at different body sites before and after a painful conditioning stimulus (CS) (cuffed tourniquet) and sham CS (uncuffed tourniquet) in eleven animals. Thresholds' reliability was assessed using interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The effect of the CS was assessed calculating absolute change, percentage change of the thresholds and standard error of measurement. Baseline mechanical thresholds (Newton) were: left hindlimb 81 [73; 81]; left forearm 81 [72.1; 81]; right forearm 81 [76; 81]; left chest 80.5 [68; 81]; right chest 81 [76.5; 81]; left neck 81 [70.3; 81]; right neck 74.8 [62.3; 80.5]. Reliability of mechanical thresholds was good at right chest (ICC = 0.835) and moderate at left chest (ICC = 0.591), left hindlimb (ICC = 0.606) and left neck (ICC = 0.518). Thermal thresholds showed poor reliability in all the tested sites. A modulatory effect was present at right chest, but it was seen when both a painful CS and a sham CS was applied. Minipigs tendentially showed a pro-nociceptive profile (i.e. conditioning pain facilitation). The measured thresholds are a reference for future trials in this species. Mechanical thresholds showed to be more reliable and, therefore, more useful, than thermal ones. The pain facilitation might be explained by the phenomenon of stress induced hyperalgesia, but this finding needs to be further investigated with a stricter paradigm.
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.