% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Xu:889305,
author = {Xu, Anna and Larsen, Bart and Henn, Alina and Baller, Erica
B. and Scott, J. Cobb and Sharma, Vaishnavi and Adebimpe,
Azeez and Basbaum, Allan I. and Corder, Gregory and Dworkin,
Robert H. and Edwards, Robert R. and Woolf, Clifford J. and
Eickhoff, Simon B. and Eickhoff, Claudia R. and
Satterthwaite, Theodore D.},
title = {{B}rain {R}esponses to {N}oxious {S}timuli in {P}atients
{W}ith {C}hronic {P}ain},
journal = {JAMA network open},
volume = {4},
number = {1},
issn = {2574-3805},
address = {Chicago, Ill.},
publisher = {American Medical Association},
reportid = {FZJ-2021-00197},
pages = {e2032236},
year = {2021},
abstract = {Importance Functional neuroimaging is a valuable tool for
understanding how patients with chronic pain respond to
painful stimuli. However, past studies have reported
heterogenous results, highlighting opportunities for a
quantitative meta-analysis to integrate existing data and
delineate consistent associations across studies.Objective
To identify differential brain responses to noxious stimuli
in patients with chronic pain using functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI) while adhering to current best
practices for neuroimaging meta-analyses.Data Sources All
fMRI experiments published from January 1, 1990, to May 28,
2019, were identified in a literature search of
PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library,
PsycINFO, and SCOPUS.Study Selection Experiments comparing
brain responses to noxious stimuli in fMRI between patients
and controls were selected if they reported whole-brain
results, included at least 10 patients and 10 healthy
control participants, and used adequate statistical
thresholding (voxel-height P < .001 or cluster-corrected
P < .05). Two independent reviewers evaluated titles and
abstracts returned by the search. In total, 3682 abstracts
were screened, and 1129 full-text articles were
evaluated.Data Extraction and Synthesis Thirty-seven
experiments from 29 articles met inclusion criteria for
meta-analysis. Coordinates reporting significant activation
differences between patients with chronic pain and healthy
controls were extracted. These data were meta-analyzed using
activation likelihood estimation. Data were analyzed from
December 2019 to February 2020.Main Outcomes and Measures A
whole-brain meta-analysis evaluated whether reported
differences in brain activation in response to noxious
stimuli between patients and healthy controls were spatially
convergent. Follow-up analyses examined the directionality
of any differences. Finally, an exploratory
(nonpreregistered) region-of-interest analysis examined
differences within the pain network.Results The 37
experiments from 29 unique articles included a total of 511
patients and 433 controls (944 participants). Whole-brain
meta-analyses did not reveal significant differences between
patients and controls in brain responses to noxious stimuli
at the preregistered statistical threshold. However,
exploratory analyses restricted to the pain network revealed
aberrant activity in patients.Conclusions and Relevance In
this systematic review and meta-analysis, preregistered,
whole-brain analyses did not reveal aberrant fMRI activity
in patients with chronic pain. Exploratory analyses
suggested that subtle, spatially diffuse differences may
exist within the pain network. Future work on chronic pain
biomarkers may benefit from focus on this core set of
pain-responsive areas.},
cin = {INM-7 / INM-1},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)INM-1-20090406},
pnm = {525 - Decoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction
(POF4-525)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-525},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {33399857},
UT = {WOS:000610371800003},
doi = {10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.32236},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/889305},
}