Free
Education  |   January 2001
Effect of Remifentanil on Pain and Secondary Hyperalgesia Associated with the Heat–Capsaicin Sensitization Model in Healthy Volunteers
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Karin L. Petersen, M.D.
    *
  • Bruce Jones, M.D.
  • Veronica Segredo, M.D.
  • Jørgen B. Dahl, M.D., Ph.D.
    §
  • Michael C. Rowbotham, M.D.
  • * Postdoctoral Fellow, Pain Clinical Research Center, Department of Neurology,
  • † Clinical Instructor, Department of Emergency Medicine,
  • ‡ Assistant Adjunct Professor, Department of Anesthesia,
  • ∥ Associate Professor, Pain Clinical Research Center, Departments of Neurology and Anesthesia, University of California–San Francisco.
  • * Laboratory of Pain Physiology, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, § Clinical Director, Division of Anesthesia and Postoperative Care, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Herlev University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark.
Article Information
Education
Education   |   January 2001
Effect of Remifentanil on Pain and Secondary Hyperalgesia Associated with the Heat–Capsaicin Sensitization Model in Healthy Volunteers
Anesthesiology 1 2001, Vol.94, 15-20. doi:
Anesthesiology 1 2001, Vol.94, 15-20. doi:
HUMAN experimental pain models can play an important role in the study of pain mechanisms and in the testing of new analgesic drugs. 1–3 The current path of testing new analgesic drugs moves from studies of animal experimental pain models to pharmacokinetics–tolerability studies in healthy volunteers. Costly clinical trials in pain patients are then initiated without proof that the drug to be tested has analgesic activity in humans. Using human experimental pain models, new drugs could be tested rapidly and efficiently in healthy volunteers for analgesic potency and side effects profile under randomized, double-blind conditions. Limitations of the existing human experimental pain models lead to the development of the heat–capsaicin sensitization model. 4 
As originally described in normal human subjects by Lewis, 5 prolonged or intense focal noxious stimulation produces reversible cutaneous sensory changes. Such stimuli produce a zone of primary hyperalgesia, comprising the stimulated area and characterized by lowered pain thresholds (allodynia) to thermal and mechanical stimulation and an enhanced response to suprathreshold stimulation (hyperalgesia). Neurophysiologic studies in humans have demonstrated that primary hyperalgesia is caused in part by sensitization of primary afferent nociceptors. 6 In a zone around the area of primary hyperalgesia (where no stimulation was performed), secondary hyperalgesia is present. In this area there is dynamic mechanical allodynia 7–9 transmitted via  Aß fibers 10–12 and tactile hyperalgesia probably transmitted via  Aδ or C fibers. In animals, the receptive field of spinal cord dorsal horn neurons enlarges, and their response to Aß-mechanoreceptor stimulation increases after intense noxious stimulation. 13 Hence, secondary hyperalgesia is believed to be caused mainly by sensitization of central pain transmission neurons.
An ideal human experimental pain model would induce stable and long-lasting sensory changes without tissue injury. Because the duration and the extent of the secondary hyperalgesia area depend on the intensity of the initial stimulus applied to the primary zone, previous models that have produced long-lasting secondary hyperalgesia have also had the potential for skin injury or have been invasive. Stimulation at 45°C for 3 min produces secondary hyperalgesia lasting no more than a few minutes after termination of the heat stimulus. 14 As used in the burn-injury model, stimulation at 47°C for 7 min produces stable and long-lasting primary and secondary hyperalgesia. 9,14–16 However, a definite skin injury with blistering or skin pigmentation changes occurs in up to 25% of young healthy male volunteers. 15,16 Models using capsaicin can produce pain and primary and secondary hyperalgesia. Sensory changes after low-strength (0.1%) topical capsaicin are minimal, and with a higher concentration (1%), sensory changes are more pronounced but still brief. 12,17,18 Intradermal injection of capsaicin results in rapid-onset intense pain and long-lasting secondary hyperalgesia. 8,19–21 
The recently developed heat–capsaicin sensitization model noninvasively combines lower levels of thermal and chemical stimulation to produce long-lasting cutaneous hyperalgesia without obvious cutaneous injury. 4 By periodically heating the zone of primary hyperalgesia to a previously nonpainful temperature of 40°C, stable areas of secondary hyperalgesia can be maintained for at least 4 h. The aim of the present study was to validate the heat–capsaicin sensitization model as a tool in testing analgesic drug efficacy. The potent high efficacy μ-opioid receptor agonist remifentanil was used as a positive control because opioids have been demonstrated to suppress both clinical and experimental pain. 3 Remifentanil has no significant effect at other types of opioid receptors and is metabolized rapidly to an inactive metabolite by nonspecific plasma esterases with a systemic half-life of 9–11 min and a “context-sensitive” half-life time (the time to a 50% decrease of the effective site concentration) of approximately 3–4 min. 22–24 
Materials and Methods
Subjects
Subjects were paid healthy male and female volunteers. All were free of pain, medication, and caffeine at the time of testing and had no history of opioid use. After providing informed written consent, subjects underwent a separate orientation session to familiarize them with the heat–capsaicin sensitization method, sensory testing, and pain ratings. During the two infusion sessions, 1 week apart, subjects received infusions of saline or remifentanil in random order under double-blind conditions. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by both the Committee on Human Research at the University of California–San Francisco and the California Research Advisory Panel.
Pain and Hyperalgesia Assessment
Pain during thermal stimulation was rated continuously on a computerized visual analog scale (VAS). The VAS was anchored with the descriptors “no pain” and “worst pain imaginable.” Pain during capsaicin stimulation was rated at 5-min intervals on a 100-mm pen-and-paper VAS, anchored by the same descriptors.
The area of secondary hyperalgesia was quantified with a foam paintbrush and a 20.9-g von Frey hair (a mildly noxious pinlike sensation) by stimulating along four linear paths arranged vertically and horizontally around the stimulation site in 5-mm steps at 1-s intervals. Stimulation along each path started well outside the hyperalgesic area and continued toward the treated skin area until subjects reported a definite change in sensation (burning, tenderness, more intense pricking). The border was marked on the skin with a felt pen, and the rostral–caudal and lateral–medial distances were measured for surface area calculations.
Heat Stimulation
Thermal stimulation was conducted using the Medoc TSA 2001 (Medoc, Minneapolis, MN). The 15.7-cm2surface area thermode is a computer-controlled Peltier device that warms the skin surface at a linear rate from a probe holding temperature of 32°C to a safety cutoff of 50°C. Before sensitization, the heat pain detection threshold (HPDT) was determined four times in a site in nontreated skin on the nondominant forearm. HPDT was defined as the median of the four determinations and was measured five times throughout the study day. Another stimulus location was marked in nontreated skin on the nondominant upper arm, and in this site subjects were asked to rate the painfulness of a 1-min 45°C heat stimulus (long thermal stimulation [LTS]) on the electronic VAS five times throughout the study day.
Heat–Capsaicin Sensitization
The treatment site was marked with a felt pen on the dominant forearm (22.8 cm2). Sensitization was produced by heating the skin of the forearm to 45°C for 5 min with the thermode. During heat stimulation, pain was rated continuously on the electronic VAS. After heat stimulation, the area of secondary hyperalgesia to brush and von Frey hair stimulation was mapped. Immediately thereafter, the skin was covered with capsaicin cream (0.075% Capsaicin; Clay-Park Labs Inc., New York, New York) for 30 min. After capsaicin removal, the area of secondary hyperalgesia was mapped again. The sensitization was rekindled four times at 40-min intervals throughout the study day by heating the treatment site with the thermode at 40°C for 5 min. The first rekindling was performed 80 min after initial heat sensitization, and the last rekindling was performed at 200 min after initial sensitization. Mapping of secondary hyperalgesia areas was performed after each rekindling.
Study Drug Infusion Sessions
The timing of the procedures is summarized in figure 1. Infusions were performed and monitored by the authors (B. J. or V. S.). The remifentanil and saline placebo solutions were prepared in coded infusion syringes by a physician not involved in the study. At the beginning of the infusion session, an intravenous catheter was placed on the dorsal side of the nondominant hand and was kept open with saline. The heat–capsaicin sensitization was established. Immediately after the first rekindling cycle, baseline areas of secondary hyperalgesia to brush and von Frey hair stimulation were determined along with baseline HPDT and ratings of the painfulness of LTS. The infusion was then started. The study drug was administered by an electronic pump (Baxter AS48 syringe pump; Baxter Healthcare, Deerfield, IL) as a slow intravenous infusion beginning at 0.05 μg · kg1· min1remifentanil (or equivalent volume of saline). After 5 min, the infusion rate of remifentanil was increased to 0.1 μg · kg1· min1and maintained at this level for an additional 35 min before the infusion was stopped. If the respiration rate decreased to less than 6 breaths/min, the infusion rate was reduced to 0.05 μg · kg1· min1. During the infusion, heart rate and rhythm, blood pressure, respiration rate, and oxygen saturation were monitored continuously. Oxygen was administered via  a nasal catheter (2 l/min) during the entire infusion time. A 6-item side-effect checklist (nausea, itching, dry mouth, sleepy, light-headed, spacey) was completed by the anesthesiologist every 5 min using a 0–3 numerical scale (0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe). The second rekindling cycle was performed after 25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1, and immediately thereafter, the areas of secondary hyperalgesia to brush and von Frey hair stimulation were determined along with HPDT and painfulness of LTS. The infusion was then turned off. A third and fourth rekindling cycle was performed after the infusion was terminated (30 and 70 min after infusion), and after these rekindling cycles, the area of secondary hyperalgesia, HPDT, and painfulness of LTS were determined.
Fig. 1. Time course in minutes of infusion sessions. H/C = heat–capsaicin sensitization; RK = rekindling (40°C for 5 min); LTS = long thermal stimulation (45°C for 1 min); Remi/placebo = infusion with remifentanil or placebo. See text for infusion rates.
Fig. 1. Time course in minutes of infusion sessions. H/C = heat–capsaicin sensitization; RK = rekindling (40°C for 5 min); LTS = long thermal stimulation (45°C for 1 min); Remi/placebo = infusion with remifentanil or placebo. See text for infusion rates.
Fig. 1. Time course in minutes of infusion sessions. H/C = heat–capsaicin sensitization; RK = rekindling (40°C for 5 min); LTS = long thermal stimulation (45°C for 1 min); Remi/placebo = infusion with remifentanil or placebo. See text for infusion rates.
×
Statistical Analysis
Data are presented as mean values ± SD. Painfulness of the initial heating (45°C for 5 min) and LTS are calculated as area under the curve converted to VAS values on a 0–100 scale and reported as mean VAS values over the stimulation period. The primary outcome measures (area of secondary hyperalgesia to brush and von Frey hair stimulation and painfulness of LTS) are each expressed as a percentage of baseline values (preinfusion) and were analyzed using paired t  tests. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to analyze changes in HPDT as these could be positive or negative. A P  value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results
Sixteen subjects were enrolled, and the 14 (9 men, 5 women; mean age, 34 yr [range, 22–56 yr]) who completed both infusion sessions are included in the data analysis. Two subjects receiving remifentanil in their first session did not complete the study; one cited family reasons, and one withdrew consent.
Heat–Capsaicin Sensitization
In all 14 subjects, initial sensitization from heat stimulation with 45°C for 5 min produced an area of secondary hyperalgesia to brush and von Frey hair stimulation (brush: 71 ± 39 cm2; von Frey hair: 90 ± 55 cm2; mean of study days 1 and 2 ± SD). The areas expanded after 30-min application of 0.075% topical capsaicin (brush: 124 ± 60 cm2; von Frey hair: 142 ± 65 cm2). After the first rekindling cycle (preinfusion baseline), the areas were 112 ± 48 cm2(brush) and 128 ± 63 cm2(von Frey hair). The baseline areas of secondary hyperalgesia to brush stimulation were slightly smaller on the remifentanil day (103 ± 46 cm2) than on the placebo day (122 ± 54 cm2;P  = 0.03), but the baseline areas of secondary hyperalgesia to von Frey hair stimulation (remifentanil: 125 ± 59 cm2; placebo: 132 ± 71 cm2) and other pain measures did not differ between the two infusion days. The average painfulness of the initial heat stimulation (45°C for 5 min) was 32 ± 17 on the electronic VAS. The maximal pain ratings during the 30-min capsaicin stimulation was 37 ± 24 on the 100-mm pen-and-paper VAS, which was reached between 20 and 30 min of stimulation. All subjects developed skin redness and flare. The flare lasted for up to 2 h, and the redness persisted for up to 12 h. Beyond that, no skin changes were observed.
Effects of Remifentanil
During the infusion of remifentanil, the area of secondary hyperalgesia to brush stimulation was reduced to 29% of baseline size (28 ± 9 cm2) compared with 75% of baseline (92 ± 53 cm2) during infusion of placebo (P  = 0.0002;fig. 2A). A similar reduction was observed in the area of secondary hyperalgesia to von Frey hair stimulation. During remifentanil infusion the area was 30% of baseline (34 ± 17 cm2), whereas during placebo the area was 83% of baseline (106 ± 54 cm2;P  < 0.0001;fig. 2B). After termination of the infusion, as measured after the third rekindle, the area of secondary hyperalgesia to brush was 75%± 27% of baseline size on the placebo day, whereas on the remifentanil day the area returned to 96%± 39% of baseline size (P  = 0.11). Likewise, the area of secondary hyperalgesia to von Frey hair stimulation was 82%± 23% of baseline size on the placebo day but returned to 101%± 29% on the remifentanil day (P  = 0.06).
Fig. 2. Area of secondary hyperalgesia in percentage of baseline to brush stimulation (A  ) and von Frey hair stimulation (B  ). Baseline = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the first rekindle (before infusion); during infusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the second rekindle (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1); postinfusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the third rekindle (30 min after infusion was terminated). (C  ) Painfulness of long thermal stimulation (LTS; 45°C for 1 min) in percentage of baseline. Baseline = painfulness of LTS before infusion; during infusion = painfulness of LTS (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1). Postinfusion = painfulness of LTS 30 min after infusion was terminated.
Fig. 2. Area of secondary hyperalgesia in percentage of baseline to brush stimulation (A 
	) and von Frey hair stimulation (B 
	). Baseline = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the first rekindle (before infusion); during infusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the second rekindle (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg−1· min−1); postinfusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the third rekindle (30 min after infusion was terminated). (C 
	) Painfulness of long thermal stimulation (LTS; 45°C for 1 min) in percentage of baseline. Baseline = painfulness of LTS before infusion; during infusion = painfulness of LTS (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg−1· min−1). Postinfusion = painfulness of LTS 30 min after infusion was terminated.
Fig. 2. Area of secondary hyperalgesia in percentage of baseline to brush stimulation (A  ) and von Frey hair stimulation (B  ). Baseline = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the first rekindle (before infusion); during infusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the second rekindle (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1); postinfusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the third rekindle (30 min after infusion was terminated). (C  ) Painfulness of long thermal stimulation (LTS; 45°C for 1 min) in percentage of baseline. Baseline = painfulness of LTS before infusion; during infusion = painfulness of LTS (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1). Postinfusion = painfulness of LTS 30 min after infusion was terminated.
×
Before study drug infusion, the mean painfulness of LTS (45°C for 1 min) was 28 ± 12 on the electronic VAS. During remifentanil infusion, the mean painfulness of LTS was reduced to 8 ± 8 on the 0–100 VAS scale compared with 22 ± 14 during the placebo infusion, equivalent to 29% of baseline during remifentanil compared with 84% of baseline during the placebo infusion (P  = 0.0003;fig. 2C). After the remifentanil infusion was terminated, the painfulness of LTS exceeded baseline levels (103% of baseline), whereas on the placebo day, the painfulness was rated as 92% of baseline (P  = 0.43).
The HPDT in normal skin increased 2°C during the remifentanil infusion compared with baseline (baseline: 42.4 ± 1.9°C; during infusion: 44.4 ± 1.5°C). During the placebo infusion, HPDT increased only 0.6°C compared with baseline (baseline: 42.3 ± 1.8°C; during infusion: 42.8 ± 1.9°C). This difference between the infusion days was significant (P  = 0.01, Wilcoxon signed rank test). After the infusion was turned off, the HPDT decreased to 41.6 ± 2.4°C on the remifentanil day and to 42.3 ± 1.9°C on the placebo day (P  = 0.43).
Physiologic Measures during Drug Infusion
The mean total dose of remifentanil was 242.4 ± 36 μg. In all subjects, the remifentanil infusion rate was increased to 0.1 μg · kg1· min1after 5 min of infusion at 0.05 μg · kg1· min1. In one subject, the respiration rate decreased to 4 breaths/min after 10-min infusion with 0.1 μg · kg1· min1but without oxygen desaturation. The infusion rate was decreased to 0.05 μg · kg1· min1for the remainder of the infusion period, and the respiration rate immediately normalized. All subjects maintained oxygen saturation above 97%. Blood pressure and heart rate stayed within normal physiologic limits.
Side Effects
The side effects (highest ratings during the infusion) are listed in table 1. Side effects were more severe during the remifentanil infusion than during placebo (P  < 0.005). Most prominent were descriptions of feeling “spacey” and “itching.” No subject requested early termination of the infusion because of side effects, and the side effects were not severe enough to impair the subject’s ability to cooperate with the sensory testing performed during infusion. One subject reported chills and goose flesh during the postinfusion period. No other subject reported opioid withdrawal-like symptoms. In all subjects, side effects disappeared 10 min after the infusion was terminated.
Table 1. Side Effect Ratings during Remifentanil Infusion
Image not available
Table 1. Side Effect Ratings during Remifentanil Infusion
×
Discussion
As in our previous study, the heat–capsaicin sensitization procedure induced stable, quantifiable, long-lasting, secondary hyperalgesia without tissue injury. 4 Secondary hyperalgesia to brush and von Frey hair stimulation was reliably and profoundly suppressed during infusion of remifentanil compared with placebo, demonstrating analgesic responsiveness of the heat–capsaicin sensitization model. The areas of secondary hyperalgesia had returned to baseline levels by the next measurement, 30 min after the remifentanil infusion had been stopped. The rapid return to preinfusion levels of the areas of secondary hyperalgesia demonstrates that the underlying sensitization is able to persist through a brief period of intense suppression by the potent opioid remifentanil.
To our knowledge, the analgesic effect of remifentanil on cutaneous secondary hyperalgesia has not previously been investigated. It has been demonstrated that painfulness of capsaicin injection and the area of secondary hyperalgesia to pin-prick stimulation was reduced during infusion of high-dose alfentanil (a longer-acting μ-opioid agonist). 20,21,25 Administering a single intravenous bolus dose of morphine (0.15 mg/kg), Warncke et al.  26 failed to demonstrate an analgesic effect on the area of secondary hyperalgesia after experimental burn injury. In two of the studies, it was difficult to analyze opioid effects on secondary hyperalgesia to gentle mechanical stimuli because the area either did not develop after capsaicin injection or rapidly disappeared. 20,21 
In the present study, infusion of remifentanil reduced the painfulness of LTS and increased the HPDTs. In humans, a dose-dependent reduction of painfulness of acute noxious stimulation with intravenous administration of morphine, alfentanil, fentanyl, and hydromorphone has been demonstrated. 3,27–29 In addition, a dose-dependent reduction in pain intensity and “bothersomeness” of cold-pressor testing during remifentanil infusion has been demonstrated. 30,31 Single-dose studies of intravenous opioids (0.1–0.15 mg/kg) have been less consistent; ischemic pain was reduced 32 but not laser warmth and pin-prick thresholds 33 and HPDTs. 26 
Remifentanil analgesia disappeared rapidly, as evidenced by the return to preinfusion values for secondary hyperalgesia areas, painfulness of LTS, and the HPDT. In fact, there is evidence to suggest transient withdrawal hyperalgesia was present 30 min after infusion. While the areas of secondary hyperalgesia remained at 75–82% of baseline size after the placebo infusion had been turned off, the areas returned to 96–101% of baseline size after the remifentanil infusion was turned off. The time course of the cutaneous hyperalgesia on the placebo day are similar to those observed in the earlier methodology study. Furthermore, the painfulness of LTS and HPDTs after remifentanil infusion are also consistent with withdrawal hyperalgesia, albeit not statistically significant. It has been shown in animal studies that during both precipitated and nonprecipitated opioid withdrawal, animals develop hyperalgesia to acute noxious thermal stimulation. 34,35 It is possible that with the ultrashort half-life of remifentanil, the first postinfusion measurement cycle was already past the peak period of withdrawal hyperalgesia. Spontaneous complaints of withdrawal-like symptoms after remifentanil infusion occurred in one subject and lasted only 10 min.
The subjects consistently reported a higher side-effect score during the remifentanil infusion than during placebo. This may have led to unintentional unblinding of both subjects and investigators. However, we believe that unblinding alone cannot account for the potent opioid analgesic effects observed on every pain-related outcome measure. In a previous study of opioid effects on chronic pain, patients given intravenous benzodiazepines in doses sufficient to match opioid-induced sedation did not experience pain relief. 36 
The heat–capsaicin sensitization model of human experimental pain uses temporary noxious stimulation in a normally functioning pain transmission system to induce temporary peripheral and central sensitization. Chronic sensitization of central pain transmission neurons has been suggested as an important underlying mechanism in chronic pain syndromes. 37–39 In a recent clinical study of patients with postherpetic neuralgia, we used a topical capsaicin challenge to provide indirect evidence of central nervous system sensitization in the form of chronic secondary hyperalgesia as an underlying pain mechanism in some patients. 40 Moreover, pain and touch-evoked allodynia in postherpetic neuralgia is reduced by opioids. 41 As studies in healthy volunteers are more simple, safer, and can be performed more rapidly than clinical trials in chronic pain patients, the present study supports using human experimental pain models to test new analgesic drugs.
The authors thank Erika K. Friedman, B.S., (Senior Research Coordinator, Pain Clinical Research Center, University of California–San Francisco) for invaluable assistance, and Jayson Gaspar, B.S., (Research Assistant, Pain Clinical Research Center, University of California–San Francisco) for key technical assistance.
References
Arendt-Nielsen L: Induction and assessment of experimental pain from human skin, muscle, and viscera, Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Pain. Edited by Jensen TS TJ, Wiesenfeld-Hallin Z. Seattle, IASP Press, 1997, pp 393–425
Petersen KL: Experimental cutaneous hyperalgesia in humans. IASP Newsletter 1997; Nov/Dec:4–8
Gracely RH: Studies of pain in human subjects, Textbook of Pain, 4th Edition. Edited by Wall PD, Melzack R. Ediburgh, Churchill Livingstone, 1999, pp 385–408
Petersen KL, Rowbotham MC: A new human experimental pain model: The heat/capsaicin sensitization model. Neuroreport 1999; 10: 1511–6Petersen, KL Rowbotham, MC
Lewis T: Pain. New York, Macmillan, 1942
LaMotte RH, Lundberg LE, Torebjörk HE: Pain, hyperalgesia and activity in nociceptive C units in humans after intradermal injection of capsaicin. J Physiol 1992; 448: 749–64LaMotte, RH Lundberg, LE Torebjörk, HE
Raja SN, Campbell JN, Meyer RA: Evidence for different mechanisms of primary and secondary hyperalgesia following heat injury to the glabrous skin. Brain 1984; 107: 1179–88Raja, SN Campbell, JN Meyer, RA
LaMotte RH, Shain CN, Simone DA, Tsai EF: Neurogenic hyperalgesia: Psychophysical studies of underlying mechanisms. J Neurophysiol 1991; 66: 190–211LaMotte, RH Shain, CN Simone, DA Tsai, EF
Dahl JB, Brennum J, Arendt-Nielsen L, Jensen TS, Kehlet H: The effect of pre- versus postinjury infiltration with lidocaine on thermal and mechanical hyperalgesia after heat injury to the skin. Pain 1993; 53: 43–51Dahl, JB Brennum, J Arendt-Nielsen, L Jensen, TS Kehlet, H
Koltzenburg M, Lundberg LE, Torebjörk HE: Dynamic and static components of mechanical hyperalgesia in human hairy skin. Pain 1992; 51: 207–19Koltzenburg, M Lundberg, LE Torebjörk, HE
Torebjörk HE, Lundberg LE, LaMotte RH: Central changes in processing of mechanoreceptive input in capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia in humans. J Physiol 1992; 448: 765–80Torebjörk, HE Lundberg, LE LaMotte, RH
Koltzenburg M, Torebjörk HE, Wahren LK: Nociceptor modulated central sensitization causes mechanical hyperalgesia in acute chemogenic and chronic neuropathic pain. Brain 1994; 117: 579–91Koltzenburg, M Torebjörk, HE Wahren, LK
Simone DA, Sorkin LS, Oh U, Chung JM, Owens C, LaMotte RH, Willis WD: Neurogenic hyperalgesia: Central neural correlates in responses of spinothalamic tract neurons. J Neurophysiol 1991; 66: 228–46Simone, DA Sorkin, LS Oh, U Chung, JM Owens, C LaMotte, RH Willis, WD
Brennum J, Dahl JB, Møiniche S, Arendt-Nielsen L: Quantitative sensory examination of epidural anaesthesia and analgesia in man: Effects of pre- and post-traumatic morphine on hyperalgesia. Pain 1994; 59: 261–71Brennum, J Dahl, JB Møiniche, S Arendt-Nielsen, L
Petersen KL, Brennum J, Dahl JB: Experimental evaluation of the analgesic effect of ibuprofen on primary and secondary hyperalgesia. Pain 1997; 70: 167–74Petersen, KL Brennum, J Dahl, JB
Pedersen JL, Kehlet H: Hyperalgesia in a human model of acute inflammatory pain: A methodological study. Pain 1998; 74: 139–51Pedersen, JL Kehlet, H
Andersen OK, Gracely RH, Arendt-Nielsen L: Facilitation of the human nociceptive reflex by stimulation of A-beta-fibres in a secondary hyperalgesic area sustained by nociceptive input from the primary hyperalgesic area. Acta Physiol Scand 1995; 155: 87–97Andersen, OK Gracely, RH Arendt-Nielsen, L
Andersen OK, Felsby S, Nicolaisen L, Bjerring P, Jensen TS, Arendt-Nielsen L: The effect of ketamin on stimulation of primary and secondary hyperalgesic areas induced by capsaicin: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, human experimental study. Pain 1996; 66: 51–62Andersen, OK Felsby, S Nicolaisen, L Bjerring, P Jensen, TS Arendt-Nielsen, L
Simone DA, Baumann TK, LaMotte RH: Dose-dependent pain and mechanical hyperalgesia in humans after intradermal injection of capsaicin. Pain 1989; 38: 99–107Simone, DA Baumann, TK LaMotte, RH
Park KM, Max MB, Robinovitz E, Gracely RH, Bennett GJ: Effects of intravenous ketamine, alfentanil, or placebo on pain, pinprick hyperalgesia, and allodynia produced by intradermal capsaicin in human subjects. Pain 1995; 63: 163–72Park, KM Max, MB Robinovitz, E Gracely, RH Bennett, GJ
Sethna NF, Liu M, Gracely R, Bennett GJ, Max MB: Analgesic and cognitive effects of intravenous ketamine-alfentanil combinations versus either drug alone after intradermal capsaicin in normal subjects. Anesth Analg 1998; 86: 1250–6Sethna, NF Liu, M Gracely, R Bennett, GJ Max, MB
Glass PS, Hardman D, Kamiyama Y, Quill TJ, Marton G, Donn KH, Grosse CM, Hermann D: Preliminary pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an ultra-short- acting opioid: Remifentanil (GI87084B). Anesth Analg 1993; 77: 1031–40Glass, PS Hardman, D Kamiyama, Y Quill, TJ Marton, G Donn, KH Grosse, CM Hermann, D
Kapila A, Glass PS, Jacobs JR, Muir KT, Hermann DJ, Shiraishi M, Howell S, Smith RL: Measured context-sensitive half-times of remifentanil and alfentanil [see comments]. Anesthesiology 1995; 83: 968–75Kapila, A Glass, PS Jacobs, JR Muir, KT Hermann, DJ Shiraishi, M Howell, S Smith, RL
Egan TD, Minto CF, Hermann DJ, Barr J, Muir KT, Shafer SL: Remifentanil versus alfentanil: Comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in healthy adult male volunteers. Anesthesiology 1996; 84: 821–33Egan, TD Minto, CF Hermann, DJ Barr, J Muir, KT Shafer, SL
Eisenach JC, Hood DD, Curry R, Tong C: Alfentanil, but not amitriptyline, reduces pain, hyperalgesia, and allodynia from intradermal injection of capsaicin in humans. Anesthesiology 1997; 86: 1279–87Eisenach, JC Hood, DD Curry, R Tong, C
Warncke T, Stubhaug A, Jørum E: Ketamine, an NMDA receptor antagonist, suppresses spatial and temporal properties of burn-induced secondary hyperalgesia in man: A double-blind, cross-over comparison with morphine and placebo. Pain 1997; 72: 99–106Warncke, T Stubhaug, A Jørum, E
Price DD, Von der Gruen A, Miller J, Rafii A, Price C: A psychophysical analysis of morphine analgesia. Pain 1985; 22: 261–9Price, DD Von der Gruen, A Miller, J Rafii, A Price, C
Hill HF, Chapman CR, Saeger LS, Bjurstrom R, Walter MH, Schoene RB, Kippes M: Steady-state infusions of opioids in human: II. Concentration-effect relationships and therapeutic margins. Pain 1990; 43: 69–79Hill, HF Chapman, CR Saeger, LS Bjurstrom, R Walter, MH Schoene, RB Kippes, M
Coda B, Tanaka A, Jacobson RC, Donaldson G, Chapman CR: Hydromorphone analgesia after intravenous bolus administration. Pain 1997; 71: 41–8Coda, B Tanaka, A Jacobson, RC Donaldson, G Chapman, CR
Vinik HR, Kissin I: Rapid development of tolerance to analgesia during remifentanil infusion in humans. Anesth Analg 1998; 86: 1307–11Vinik, HR Kissin, I
Black ML, Hill JL, Zacny JP: Behavioral and physiological effects of remifentanil and alfentanil in healthy volunteers. Anesthesiology 1999; 90: 718–26Black, ML Hill, JL Zacny, JP
Segerdahl M, Ekblom A, Sollevi A: The influence of adenosine, ketamine, and morphine on experimentally induced ischemic pain in healthy volunteers. Anesth Analg 1994; 79: 787–91Segerdahl, M Ekblom, A Sollevi, A
van der Burght M, Rasmussen SE, Arendt-Nielsen L, Bjerring P: Morphine does not affect laser induced warmth and pin prick pain thresholds. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1994; 38: 161–4van der Burght, M Rasmussen, SE Arendt-Nielsen, L Bjerring, P
Bederson JB, Fields HL, Barbaro NM: Hyperalgesia during naloxone-precipitated withdrawal from morphine is associated with increased on-cell activity in the rostral ventromedial medulla. Somatosens Mot Res 1990; 7: 185–203Bederson, JB Fields, HL Barbaro, NM
Kaplan H, Fields HL: Hyperalgesia during acute opioid abstinence: Evidence for a nociceptive facilitating function of the rostral ventromedial medulla. J Neurosci 1991; 11: 1433–9Kaplan, H Fields, HL
Dellemijn P: Randomized double-blind active-placebo-controlled crossover trial of intravenous fentanyl in neuropathic pain. Lancet 1997; 349: 753–8Dellemijn, P
Campbell JN, Raja SN, Meyer RA, Mackinnon SE: Myelinated afferents signal the hyperalgesia associated with nerve injury. Pain 1988; 32: 89–94Campbell, JN Raja, SN Meyer, RA Mackinnon, SE
Gracely RH, Lynch SA, Bennett GJ: Painful neuropathy: Altered central processing maintained dynamically by peripheral input. Pain 1992; 51: 175–94Gracely, RH Lynch, SA Bennett, GJ
Koltzenburg M, Torebjork HE, Wahren LK: Nociceptor modulated central sensitization causes mechanical hyperalgesia in acute chemogenic and chronic neuropathic pain. Brain 1994; 117: 579–91Koltzenburg, M Torebjork, HE Wahren, LK
Petersen KL, Fields HL, Brennum J, Sandroni P, Rowbotham MC: Capsaicin evoked pain and allodynia in post-herpetic neuralgia. Pain 2000; 88: 125–33Petersen, KL Fields, HL Brennum, J Sandroni, P Rowbotham, MC
Rowbotham MC, Reisner-Keller LA, Fields HL: Both intravenous lidocaine and morphine reduce the pain of postherpetic neuralgia. Neurology 1991; 41: 1024–8Rowbotham, MC Reisner-Keller, LA Fields, HL
Fig. 1. Time course in minutes of infusion sessions. H/C = heat–capsaicin sensitization; RK = rekindling (40°C for 5 min); LTS = long thermal stimulation (45°C for 1 min); Remi/placebo = infusion with remifentanil or placebo. See text for infusion rates.
Fig. 1. Time course in minutes of infusion sessions. H/C = heat–capsaicin sensitization; RK = rekindling (40°C for 5 min); LTS = long thermal stimulation (45°C for 1 min); Remi/placebo = infusion with remifentanil or placebo. See text for infusion rates.
Fig. 1. Time course in minutes of infusion sessions. H/C = heat–capsaicin sensitization; RK = rekindling (40°C for 5 min); LTS = long thermal stimulation (45°C for 1 min); Remi/placebo = infusion with remifentanil or placebo. See text for infusion rates.
×
Fig. 2. Area of secondary hyperalgesia in percentage of baseline to brush stimulation (A  ) and von Frey hair stimulation (B  ). Baseline = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the first rekindle (before infusion); during infusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the second rekindle (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1); postinfusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the third rekindle (30 min after infusion was terminated). (C  ) Painfulness of long thermal stimulation (LTS; 45°C for 1 min) in percentage of baseline. Baseline = painfulness of LTS before infusion; during infusion = painfulness of LTS (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1). Postinfusion = painfulness of LTS 30 min after infusion was terminated.
Fig. 2. Area of secondary hyperalgesia in percentage of baseline to brush stimulation (A 
	) and von Frey hair stimulation (B 
	). Baseline = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the first rekindle (before infusion); during infusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the second rekindle (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg−1· min−1); postinfusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the third rekindle (30 min after infusion was terminated). (C 
	) Painfulness of long thermal stimulation (LTS; 45°C for 1 min) in percentage of baseline. Baseline = painfulness of LTS before infusion; during infusion = painfulness of LTS (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg−1· min−1). Postinfusion = painfulness of LTS 30 min after infusion was terminated.
Fig. 2. Area of secondary hyperalgesia in percentage of baseline to brush stimulation (A  ) and von Frey hair stimulation (B  ). Baseline = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the first rekindle (before infusion); during infusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the second rekindle (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1); postinfusion = area of secondary hyperalgesia after the third rekindle (30 min after infusion was terminated). (C  ) Painfulness of long thermal stimulation (LTS; 45°C for 1 min) in percentage of baseline. Baseline = painfulness of LTS before infusion; during infusion = painfulness of LTS (25-min steady state infusion at 0.1 μg · kg1· min1). Postinfusion = painfulness of LTS 30 min after infusion was terminated.
×
Table 1. Side Effect Ratings during Remifentanil Infusion
Image not available
Table 1. Side Effect Ratings during Remifentanil Infusion
×