High Hypnotizability Impairs the Cerebellar Control of Pain

Cerebellum

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 55-61

  Bocci, Tommaso ^a   Barloscio, Davide ^a   Parenti, Laura ^a   Sartucci, Ferdinando ^a   Carli, Giancarlo ^b   Santarcangelo, Enrica L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PISA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SIENA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Cerebellum; Hypnotizability; Laser evoked potentials; Pain; Transcranial direct current stimulation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CEREBELLUM; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; HYPNOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; LASER EVOKED POTENTIAL; LATENT PERIOD; MALE; NOCICEPTION; NOCICEPTIVE STIMULATION; NORMAL HUMAN; NUMERIC RATING SCALE; TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT CURRENT STIMULATION; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; EVOKED RESPONSE; HYPNOSIS; INDIVIDUALITY; LASER; PAIN; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSICAL STIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZATION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CEREBELLUM; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPNOSIS; INDIVIDUALITY; LASERS; MALE; PAIN; PAIN PERCEPTION; PHYSICAL STIMULATION; RANDOM ALLOCATION; TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT CURRENT STIMULATION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84957584449     PISSN: 14734222     EISSN: 14734230     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12311-016-0764-2     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Duerden EG, Albanese MC. Localization of pain-related brain activation: a meta-analysis of neuroimaging data. Hum Brain Mapp. 2013;34(1):109–49.
2. Ferrucci R, Priori A. Transcranial cerebellar direct current stimulation (ctDCS): motor control, cognition, learning and emotions. Neuroimage. 2014;85(Pt 3):918–23.
3. Koziol LF, Budding D, Andreasen N, D’Arrigo S, Bulgheroni S, Imamizu H, et al. Consensus paper: the cerebellum’s role in movement and cognition. Cerebellum. 2014;13(1):151–77.
4. Strick PL, Dum RP, Fiez JA. Cerebellum and nonmotor function. Ann Rev Neurosci. 2009;32:413–34.
5. Bocci T, Santarcangelo EL, Vannini B, Torzini A, Carli G, Ferrucci R, et al. Cerebellar direct current stimulation modulates pain perception in humans. Rest Neurol Neurosci. 2015;33(5):597–609.
6. Bradnam LV, Graetz LJ, McDonnell MN, Ridding M. Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation to the cerebellum improves handwriting and cyclic drawing kinematics in focal hand dystonia. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9:286.
7. Ruscheweyh R, Kuhnel M, Filippopulos F, Blum B, Eggert T, Straube A. Altered experimental pain perception after cerebellar infarction. Pain. 2015;155(7):1303–12.
8. Li LM, Uehara K, Hanakawa T. The contribution of interindividual factors to variability of response in transcranial direct current stimulation studies. Front Cell Neurosci. 2015;9:181.
9. Benwell CS, Learmonth G, Miniussi C, Harvey M, Thut G. Non-linear effects of transcranial direct current stimulation as a function of individual baseline performance: evidence from biparietal tDCS influence on lateralized attention bias. Cortex. 2015;69:152–65.
10. Elkins GR, Barabasz AF, Council JR, Spiegel D. Advancing research and practice: the revised APA division 30 definition of hypnosis. Am J Clin Hypn. 2015;57(4):378–85.
11. Green JP, Barabasz AF, Barrett D, Montgomery GH. Forging ahead: the 2003 APA division 30 definition of hypnosis. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2005;53:259–64.
12. Santarcangelo EL. New views of hypnotizability. Front Behav Neurosci. 2014;8:224.
13. Menzocchi M, Mecacci G, Zeppi A, Carli G, Santarcangelo EL. Hypnotizability and performance on a prism adaptation test. Cerebellum. 2015;14(6):699–706.
14. Santarcangelo EL, Scattina E, Carli G, Macerata A, Manzoni D. Hypnotizability-dependent modulation of postural control: effects of alteration of the visual and leg proprioceptive inputs. Exp Brain Res. 2008;191(3):331–40.
15. Santarcangelo EL, Scattina E, Orsini P, Bruschini L, Ghelarducci B, Manzoni D. Effects of vestibular and neck proprioceptive stimulation on posture as a function of hypnotizability. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2008;56(2):170–84.
16. Di Gruttola F, Orsini P, Carboncini MC, Rossi B, Santarcangelo EL. Revisiting the association between hypnotisability and blink rate. Exp Brain Res. 2014;232(12):3763–69.
17. Balthazard GC, Woody EZ. Bimodality, dimensionality, and the notion of hypnotic types. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 1989;37:70–89.
18. Carvalho C, Kirsch I, Mazzoni G, Leal I. Portuguese norms for the Waterloo-Stanford Group C (WSGC) Scale of Hypnotic susceptibility. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2008;56:295–305.
19. De Pascalis V, Bellusci A, Russo PM. Italian norms for the Stanford Hypnotic susceptibility scale, form C. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2000;48:315–33.
20. Weitzenhoffer AM, Hilgard ER. Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, form A and B. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologist Press; 1959.
21. Balthazard CG, Woody EZ. Bimodality, dimensionality, and the notion of hypnotic types. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 1989;37(1):70–89.
22. Agostino R, Cruccu G, Iannetti G, Romaniello A, Truini A, Manfredi M. Topographical distribution of pinprick and warmth thresholds to CO2 laser stimulation on the human skin. Neurosci Lett. 2000;285(2):115–8.
23. Cruccu G, Romaniello A, Amantini A, Lombardi M, Innocenti P, Manfredi M. Assessment of trigeminal small-fiber function: brain and reflex responses evoked by CO2-laser stimulation. Muscle Nerve. 1999;22(4):508–16.
24. Grimaldi G, Argyropoulos GP, Boehringer A, Celnik P, Edwards MJ, Ferrucci R, et al. Non-invasive cerebellar stimulation—a consensus paper. Cerebellum. 2014;13(1):121–38.
25. Truini A, Galeotti F, Romaniello A, Virtuoso M, Iannetti GD, Cruccu G. Laser-evoked potentials: normative values. Clin Neurophysiol. 2005;116(4):821–26.
26. Truini A, Panuccio G, Galeotti F, Maluccio MR, Sartucci F, Avoli M, et al. Laser-evoked potentials as a tool for assessing the efficacy of antinociceptive drugs. Eur J Pain. 2010;14(2):222–25.
27. Lefaucheur JP, Brusa A, Creange A, Drouot X, Jarry G. Clinical application of laser evoked potentials using the Nd:YAG laser. Neurophysiol Clin. 2002;32(2):91–8.
28. Lefaucheur JP, Debray S, Jarry G. Laser evoked potentials using the Nd:YAG laser. Muscle Nerve. 2001;24(4):496–501.
29. Galea JM, Jayaram G, Ajagbe L, Celnik P. Modulation of cerebellar excitability by polarity-specific noninvasive direct current stimulation. J Neurosci. 2009;29(28):9115–22.
30. Arrigo A, Mormina E, Anastasi GP, Gaeta M, Calamuneri A, Quartarone A, et al. Constrained spherical deconvolution analysis of the limbic network in human, with emphasis on a direct cerebello-limbic pathway. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;8:987.
31. Valeriani M, Le Pera D, Restuccia D, de Armas L, Miliucci R, Betti V, et al. Parallel spinal pathways generate the middle-latency N1 and the late P2 components of the laser evoked potentials. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007;118(5):1097–104.
32. Wilson PH, Ruddock S, Smits-Engelsman B, Polatajko H, Blank R. Understanding performance deficits in developmental coordination disorder: a meta-analysis of recent research. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(3):217–28.
33. Cantin N, Polatajko HJ, Thach WT, Jaglal S. Developmental coordination disorder: exploration of a cerebellar hypothesis. Hum Mov Sci. 2007;26(3):491–509.
34. Jambrik Z, Santarcangelo EL, Ghelarducci B, Picano E, Sebastiani L. Does hypnotizability modulate the stress-related endothelial dysfunction? Brain Res Bull. 2004;63(3):213–6.
35. Jambrik Z, Santarcangelo EL, Rudisch T, Varga A, Forster T, Carli G. Modulation of pain-induced endothelial dysfunction by hypnotisability. Pain. 2005;116(3):181–86.
36. Contestabile A. Role of nitric oxide in cerebellar development and function: focus on granule neurons. Cerebellum. 2012;11(1):50–61.
37. Wang DJ, Su LD, Wang YN, Yang D, Sun CL, Zhou L, et al. Long-term potentiation at cerebellar parallel fiber-Purkinje cell synapses requires presynaptic and postsynaptic signaling cascades. J Neurosci. 2014;34(6):2355–64.
38. Del Percio C, Triggiani AI, Marzano N, De Rosas M, Valenzano A, Petito A, et al. Subjects’ hypnotizability level affects somatosensory evoked potentials to non-painful and painful stimuli. Clin Neurophysiol. 2013;124(7):1448–55.
39. De Pascalis V, Cacace I, Massicolle F. Focused analgesia in waking and hypnosis: effects on pain, memory, and somatosensory event-related potentials. Pain. 2008;134(1–2):197–208.
40. De Pascalis V, Varriale V, Cacace I. Pain modulation in waking and hypnosis in women: event-related potentials and sources of cortical activity. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(6), e0128474.
41. Valentini E, Betti V, Hu L, Aglioti SM. Hypnotic modulation of pain perception and of brain activity triggered by nociceptive laser stimuli. Cortex. 2013;49(2):446–62.
42. Madeo D, Castellani E, Mocenni C, Santarcangelo EL. Pain perception and EEG dynamics: does hypnotizability account for the efficacy of the suggestions of analgesia? Physiol Behav. 2015;145:57–63.
43. Santarcangelo EL, Varanini M, Paoletti G, Castellani E, Palombo C, Carli G. Pain-inducing imagery as a function of hypnotisability and of the activity of Gray’s behavioral inhibition/activation systems. Neurosci Lett. 2013;557(Pt B):184–87.
44. Barabasz A, Barabasz M, Jensen S, Calvin S, Trevisan M, Warner D. Cortical event related potentials show the structure of hypnotic suggestions is crucial. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 1999;47:5–22.
45. Crawford HJ, Corby JC, Kopell BS. Auditory event-related potentials while ignoring tone stimuli: attentional differences reflected in stimulus intensity and latency responses in low and highly hypnotizable persons. Int J Neurosci. 1996;85:57–69.
46. Gruzelier J, Gray M, Horn P. The involvement of frontally modulated attention in hypnosis and hypnotic susceptibility: cortical evoked potential evidence. Contemp Hypn. 2002;19:179–89.
47. Jensen SM, Barabasz A, Barabasz M, Warner D. EEG P300 event-related markers of hypnosis. Am J Clin Hypn. 2001;44:127–39.
48. Picazio S, Granata C, Caltagirone C, Petrosini L, Oliveri M. Shaping pseudoneglect with transcranial cerebellar direct current stimulation and music listening. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015;9:158.
49. Spiegel D, Cutcomb S, Ren C, Pribram K. Hypnotic hallucination alters evoked potentials. J Abnorm Psychol. 1985;94:249–55.
50. Barabasz AF, Lonsdale C. Effects of hypnosis on P300 olfactory-evoked potential amplitudes. J Abnorm Psychol. 1983;92:520–23.
51. Spiegel D, Barabasz AF. Effects of hypnotic instructions on P300 event-related potential amplitudes: research and clinical implications. Am J Clin Hypn. 1988;31:11–7.
52. Foti F, Mandolesi L, Cutuli D, Laricchiuta D, De Bartolo P, Gelfo F, et al. Cerebellar damage loosens the strategic use of the spatial structure of the search space. Cerebellum. 2010;9(1):29–41.
53. Silveri MC, Misciagna S, Terrezza G. Right side neglect in right cerebellar lesion. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;71(1):114–17.