Pupillometry as a Potential Objective Measurement of Pain Assessment in Healthy Volunteers
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/jpr.s461906
IF: 2.8319
2024-06-12
Journal of Pain Research
Abstract:Janika Krafthöfer, 1 Sophie-Charlotte Fabig, 1 Ralf Baron, 1 Janne Gierthmühlen 1, 2 1 Division of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany; 2 Department for Anesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany Correspondence: Janika Krafthöfer, Division of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Str. 3, Haus D, Kiel, 24105, Germany, Tel +49 431 500 23911, Fax +49 431 500 20914, Email Background: Pain leads to activation of the autonomic nervous system and thus, among other things, to pupillary reflex dilation (PRD). Previous studies have already confirmed a correlation between the perception of pain and the pupillary reaction, measured using pupillometry. However, the previous study populations were under the influence of medication for analgesia in perioperative setting or suffered from pain. This study examines the relationship between pupillary reaction and pain perception in healthy controls and addresses the question of whether endogenous pain inhibition, clinically tested by conditioned pain modulation (CPM), can be quantified using pupillometry. Methods: Forty-two healthy volunteers (21 females, 21 males, mean age 27.9 ± 5.8 years, range 20– 39 years) were included in this study. The PRD, as a measure of the pupillary reaction (variance from the base diameter in percent), was investigated during baseline, heat application and during CPM testing and results compared to the reported pain intensity on the numerical rating scale (NRS). Results: The volunteers showed higher variances under painful conditions compared to the measurement at rest corresponding to higher sympathetic activity during pain. Volunteers with a higher variance, ie a stronger pupillary reaction, gave higher pain ratings than subjects with a lower pupil variance. However, there was no correlation between the NRS and PRD. PRD and pain ratings during CPM were significantly lower compared to heat pain application alone. However, there was no correlation between the calculated CPM effect and the PRD. Conclusion: Pupillometry is capable of objectively reflecting the pain response, eg pain relief through CPM testing. However, the CPM effect calculated from the subjective pain ratings and the objective PRD measurements is not associated suggesting that both measure different aspects of pain perception. It must be discussed whether the CPM effect can be the correct measure for the functionality of the pain system. Keywords: conditioned pain modulation, descending control, pupillary reaction, pain, sympathetic nervous system The perception of pain is individual and modulated by many factors. Consequently, objectifying pain perception using simple clinical testing would be helpful. Pain leads to autonomic reactions, including pupillary reflex dilation. Higher pain intensities would lead to a greater modulation of pupil dilation via autonomic innervation of the pupil muscles. 1 However, there are contradictory results of associations between pain ratings and pupillary responses. 2–4 Additionally, most studies included patients with perioperative analgesia or chronic pain, but not a healthy cohort. However, analgesics, such as those used perioperatively, influence the pupillary reaction. 5 Therefore, it is unknown whether associations between pain and pupillary reaction also exist in healthy volunteers. The sensation of pain can be influenced by facilitating and inhibitory mechanisms, which are usually in balance in healthy people. 6 Clinically, part of the endogenous pain inhibition can be tested using Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM). The CPM effect describes changes in the pain response to a Test Stimulus (TS) triggered by the Conditioned Stimulus (CS). 7 The CPM testing is based on subjective pain ratings and is influenced by this subjectivity. 8 Overall, there are anatomical interfaces between endogenous pain inhibition and activation of the autonomic nervous system. 9 The aims of the study were thus to (a) investigate the relationship between pupillary reaction and pain perception measured with the NRS in healthy controls and (b) addresses the question of whether endogenous pain inhibition, clinically tested by CPM, can be quantified and objectified using pupillometry. Forty-two healthy volunteers, classified as healthy according to the EUROPAIN and NEUROPAIN consortia criteria, 10 (21 females, 21 males, mean age 27.9 ± -Abstract Truncated-
clinical neurology