Stable Somatotopy in Chronic Low Back Pain: Is Cortical Map Reorganization a Myth?
Doerig, M.; Cole, D.; Guekos, A.; Staempfli, P.; Schuetz, P.; Schweinhardt, P.; Meier, M. L.
Show abstract
Chronic low back pain (CLBP) has been linked to maladaptive cortical plasticity in sensorimotor regions, which may contribute to pain persistence through less distinct ("smudged") somatotopic maps of afferent input from the back. However, empirical support for such functional reorganization processes, especially in the primary somatosensory cortex (S1), is limited. To delineate precise sensory representations of the back and test for altered somatotopic processing in CLBP, we utilized an MR-compatible pneumatic vibration device and applied frequency-specific vibrotactile stimuli (20 Hz and 80 Hz) at nine thoracolumbar paraspinal sites in 45 patients with CLBP and 41 healthy controls. Representational similarity analysis (RSA) was employed via a whole-brain searchlight method, and the neural representational patterns were contrasted against theoretical models including a segmental (based on anatomical proximity), simple (upper vs. lower back division) and a random model. In addition, a machine learning classifier was trained to predict afferent input from the upper vs lower back in healthy controls and tested in CLBP patients. Both groups displayed well-organized segmental representations spanning somatosensory, motor, and posterior parietal cortices. Posterior parietal regions exhibited the best model fits, followed by S1. No evidence for differences in representational patterns between groups was found. In CLBP patients, these patterns did not show associations with pain duration, severity, fear of movement or self-reported back perception. The classifier, trained on healthy controls, accurately predicted upper vs lower back afferent input in CLBP patients. These findings indicate preserved cortical maps of the back in CLBP, challenging the hypothesis of sensory cortical reorganization in this condition. Significance StatementChronic low back pain (CLBP) is often linked to maladaptive reorganization of somatotopic maps in sensorimotor cortices, providing the mechanistic rationale for therapies like sensory discrimination training to "normalize" these maps and alleviate pain. Using frequency-specific vibrotactile stimulation of the back and multivariate fMRI analysis, we found well-organized, segmental cortical representations in both CLBP patients and healthy controls, with no evidence of group differences. Representational patterns showed no associations with clinical measures such as pain duration or intensity. These findings challenge the cortical reorganization hypothesis in CLBP and suggest sensory training benefits may involve alternative mechanisms.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- The neural dynamics of positive and negative expectations of pain 96%
- Ultra-high field imaging reveals increased whole brain connectivity underpins cognitive strategies that attenuate pain 96%
- Assessing the balance between excitation and inhibition in chronic pain through the aperiodic component of EEG 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Mapping Hand Function with Simultaneous Brain-Spinal Cord Functional MRI 96%
- Distinguishing the activity of adjacent somatosensory nuclei within the brainstem using 3T fMRI 96%
- Neural correlates of kinematic features of passive finger movement revealed by univariate and multivariate fMRI analyses 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation in humans induces pupil dilation and attenuates alpha oscillations 95%
- Electrical stimulation of temporal and limbic circuitry produces distinct responses in human ventral temporal cortex 94%
- Signatures of electrical stimulation driven network interactions in the human limbic system 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.