Cortical thickness in chronic pain

Abstract

Background: Numerous studies using a variety of non-invasive neuroimaging techniques in vivo have demonstrated that chronic pain (CP) is associated with brain alterations. Cortical thickness (CTh) via surface-based morphometry (SBM) analysis of magnetic resonance imaging data is a valid and sensitive method to investigate the structure of brain gray matter. Many studies have employed SBM to measure CTh difference between patients with CP and pain-free controls and provided important insights into the brain basis of CP. However, the findings from these studies were inconsistent and have not been quantitatively reviewed. Methods: Three major electronic medical databases: PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for eligible studies published in English on April 3, 2020. This protocol was prepared based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. The Seed-based d Mapping with Permutation of Subject Images software package will be employed to conducted a coordinate-based meta-analysis (CBMA) to identify consistent CTh differences between patients with CP and pain-free controls. Several complementary analyses, including sensitivity analysis, heterogeneity analysis, publication bias, subgroup analysis, and meta-regression analysis, will be further conducted to test the robustness of the results. Results: This CBMA will tell us whether CP with different subtypes shares common CTh alterations and what the pattern of its characterized alterations is. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this will be the first CBMA of SBM studies that characterizes brain CTh alterations in CP. The CBMA will provide the quantitative evidence of common brain cortical morphometry of CP. The findings will help us to understand the neural basis underlying CP. Trial Registration number: INPLASY202050069

Meta-analysis of cortical thickness reduction in adult schizophrenia

“…Based on previous meta-analyses of cortical thickness, 28,31 we used a 12-point checklist (details in Appendix 1, Table S1, www.jpn.ca/lookup/doi/10.1503/jpn.230081/tab-related -content) to assess the quality of each study. The checklist was divided into 3 parts: participants (items 1-6), imaging methodology and analysis (items 7-10) and results and conclusions (items [11][12].…”