Skip Navigation

British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007 98(3):366-371; doi:10.1093/bja/ael377
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Murrell, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Murrell, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, C. B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2007. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Comparative effect of thermal, mechanical, and electrical noxious stimuli on the electroencephalogram of the rat

J. C. Murrell*, S. L. Mitchinson, D. Waters and C. B. Johnson

Institute of Veterinary Animal and Biomedical Sciencesm, College of Sciences, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand

* Corresponding author: Institute of Veterinary Animal and Biomedical Sciences, College of Sciences, Massey University, Postbag 11 222, Palmerston North, New Zealand. E-mail: j.c.murrell{at}massey.ac.nz

BACKGROUND: Thermal, mechanical, and electrical stimuli are often used in acute pain studies and cause qualitatively different pain sensations. Yet, the comparative electroencephalogram (EEG) changes caused by these stimuli have not been studied. We hypothesized that because these stimuli cause different pain sensations, EEG responses would also differ.

METHODS: Anaesthesia was maintained with halothane in 46 male Sprague–Dawley rats. The EEG was recorded from the primary somatosensory cortices and vertex. Supramaximal noxious stimuli were applied to the tail and comprised mechanical (forceps clamp 20 N), thermal (52°C water bath), and electrical (50 V, 50 Hz for 2 s) stimuli. The EEG descriptors median frequency (F50), spectral edge frequency (F95), and total power (Ptot) recorded before (baseline) and after noxious stimulation were compared. Data were analysed using two-way factorial ANOVA (stimulus, EEG channel) followed by Bonferroni adjusted post-tests (P < 0.05).

RESULTS: F50 increased during electrical stimulation compared with all baseline periods in all EEG channels, increases from baseline ranging from 115.3 (SD 34.8) to 122.1 (39.6)% for the various channels. A significant increase in F50 during thermal stimulation was identified in some EEG channels, whereas no changes in F50 during mechanical stimulation occurred. Changes in F95 during any stimulus compared with baseline were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS: Different noxious stimuli caused differing EEG changes. As the somatosensory cortex contains relatively few exclusively nociceptive neurons, the EEG recorded from this region during the application of predominantly noxious stimuli (mechanical and thermal) may demonstrate minimal cortical activation compared with non-specific electrical noxious stimuli.

Keywords: anaesthetics volatile, halothane; brain, electroencephalography; pain, experimental; pain, mechanism;


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Lab AnimHome page
T J Diesch, D J Mellor, C B Johnson, and R G Lentle
Electroencephalographic responses to tail clamping in anaesthetized rat pups
Lab Anim, July 1, 2009; 43(3): 224 - 231.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.