ArticleCureus2025
Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome: A Study of Contact Heat-Evoked Potentials.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dysregulated Pain-Autonomic Responses in Patients With Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain.Pain research & management · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPersistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) type 2 is a chronic condition characterized by low back pain, with or without radiating limb pain, persisting after spinal surgery. The underlying pathophysiology remains unclear, with potential contributions from altered central pain processing mechanisms.
objectiveThis study investigates the role of central sensitization in PSPS using contact heat-evoked potentials (CHEPs), an electrophysiological tool for assessing spinothalamic tract integrity and central pain processing. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 36 healthy controls and 15 PSPS patients with neuropathic pain (NP) localized to the L4, L5, and S1 dermatomes, stimulated at the L1 dermatome. CHEP parameters, including N2-P2 amplitude, N2 latency, and P2 latency, were compared between groups.
resultsSignificant differences were identified, with PSPS patients demonstrating prolonged N2 and P2 latencies (p=0.008 and p=0.005, respectively) and reduced N2-P2 amplitude (p=0.025). Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analyses revealed N2 latency as the most reliable diagnostic parameter (AUC=0.81, sensitivity 67%, specificity 80%). Approximately 68% of PSPS patients exhibited abnormal CHEP values, suggesting spinothalamic tract dysfunction.
conclusionsThese findings support the hypothesis of altered central pain processing in PSPS, consistent with previous studies on NP and central sensitization. However, no statistically significant correlation was observed between pain intensity (verbal rating scale) and CHEP parameters (p=0.06), potentially due to the limited sample size. CHEP is a valuable non-invasive tool for exploring central pain mechanisms in PSPS with potential diagnostic and therapeutic implications. Limitations include the small sample size and potential confounders, such as subclinical polyneuropathy in controls. Further research is recommended to complement these findings and explore the broader implications of central sensitization in PSPS and other chronic pain conditions.
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.