Next Article in Journal
Gram Stain and Culture of Sputum Samples Detect Only Few Pathogens in Community-Acquired Lower Respiratory Tract Infections: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial
Next Article in Special Issue
Diagnostic Methods for Evaluation of Gastric Motility—A Mini Review
Previous Article in Journal
Evaluation of Crohn’s Disease Small-Bowel Mucosal Healing Using Capsule Endoscopy and Usefulness of Leucine-Rich α2-Glycoprotein
Previous Article in Special Issue
Roles of Heart Rate Variability in Assessing Autonomic Nervous System in Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders: A Systematic Review
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Electrophysiology as a Tool to Decipher the Network Mechanism of Visceral Pain in Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders

by
Md Jahangir Alam
* and
Jiande D. Z. Chen
*
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diagnostics 2023, 13(4), 627; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13040627
Submission received: 10 January 2023 / Revised: 27 January 2023 / Accepted: 7 February 2023 / Published: 8 February 2023

Abstract

:
Abdominal pain, including visceral pain, is prevalent in functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorders (FGIDs), affecting the overall quality of a patient’s life. Neural circuits in the brain encode, store, and transfer pain information across brain regions. Ascending pain signals actively shape brain dynamics; in turn, the descending system responds to the pain through neuronal inhibition. Pain processing mechanisms in patients are currently mainly studied with neuroimaging techniques; however, these techniques have a relatively poor temporal resolution. A high temporal resolution method is warranted to decode the dynamics of the pain processing mechanisms. Here, we reviewed crucial brain regions that exhibited pain-modulatory effects in an ascending and descending manner. Moreover, we discussed a uniquely well-suited method, namely extracellular electrophysiology, that captures natural language from the brain with high spatiotemporal resolution. This approach allows parallel recording of large populations of neurons in interconnected brain areas and permits the monitoring of neuronal firing patterns and comparative characterization of the brain oscillations. In addition, we discussed the contribution of these oscillations to pain states. In summary, using innovative, state-of-the-art methods, the large-scale recordings of multiple neurons will guide us to better understanding of pain mechanisms in FGIDs.

1. Introduction

Pain is an unpleasant experience containing sensory and emotional components. The unpleasant percept that dominates the affective dimension of pain is coupled with the motivational drive and guides us to escape from potentially harmful events associated with actual or potential tissue damage. The experience of pain is evoked by noxious stimuli or through adverse emotional events and memories. The brain receives nociceptive signals and integrates sensory, cognitive, and emotional information to respond appropriately. Pain has two distinct types, acute and chronic pain, and is very common in patients with functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorders (FGIDs). FGIDs are a group of GI conditions characterized by abdominal pain or discomfort, stool irregularities, bloating, and other somatic, visceral, and psychiatric comorbidities. FGIDs account for 40–50% of all new referrals to GI clinics [1,2]. Despite extensive research in humans and animals, the pathophysiology of FGIDs is still incompletely understood. Visceral pain and pain-related symptoms in FGIDs contribute to substantial psychological distress, functional disability, and healthcare costs. The most common FGIDs are irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)—characterized by recurrent abdominal pain associated with altered bowel habits, psychiatric conditions such as depression and anxiety, and visceral sensitivity—and Functional Dyspepsia (FD)—characterized by chronic indigestion, abdominal pain, and a feeling of fullness or bloating during and after meals.
FGIDs are considered a bio-psycho-social disorder of gut-brain interaction with unclear etiology. Despite differences in etiology, gut-brain communication is essential for understanding the pathophysiology of visceral pain in FGID [3,4,5]. However, whether brain abnormalities drive the gut symptoms or whether changes in the gut alter brain function remains poorly understood. Bidirectional connections between the gut and the central nervous system (CNS) contribute to many neurobiological functions, including microbial, immunological, metabolic, hormonal, and neural processes [6,7]. The brain–gut axis consists of a hierarchy of reflex loops assuring homeostatic control of GI function, and dysregulation of these reflexes can lead to chronic visceral pain in FGID patients [8].
In the clinical setting, pain (visceral pain) processing is mainly studied using hemodynamic brain imaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET), and neuro-electrical techniques, including electroencephalography (EEG), and magnetoencephalography (MEG). These studies have shown that changes in brain structure and function are correlated with persistent pain. In IBS patients, the brain regions associated with attention, including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), medial PFC (mPFC), and thalamus, are more active than healthy controls and may underlie symptom-related anxiety and visceral hypersensitivity [9]. Both male and female patients with IBS were shown to have upregulation of the emotional arousal circuit and altered serotonergic modulation of this circuitry was reported to play a role in centrally mediated visceral hypersensitivity [9,10]. These findings suggest modified descending pain modulation systems in patients with FGIDs. Moreover, increased excitability of the spinal dorsal horn (SDH) results in increased ascending input to brain regions processing interoceptive information [11]. IBS patients also demonstrated alteration in grey matter density in brain areas associated with cognitive and evaluative functions [12,13,14,15]. Another study hypothesized that these grey matter abnormalities might be linked to white matter changes [16]. As expected, neuroimaging studies in female IBS patients revealed white matter abnormalities in pain-related brain areas, including the ACC and IC, suggesting that these white matter changes drive the functional and grey matter abnormalities in FGID patients. In addition, neuroimaging studies have reported that FD patients show abnormal brain activities in response to gastric distension, and another study also suggested abnormalities in white matter microstructure [17,18]. Taken together from the studies discussed here, it can be summarized that visceral stimuli represent abnormal brain activity in FGID patients suggesting the alteration of ascending and descending nociceptive pathways, which may underlie the pathophysiology of visceral pain in FGIDs.

2. Animal Models in Visceral Pain Study

Rats and mice are the most commonly used animal models for studying visceral hypersensitivity (VH) in FGIDs. Multiple rodent models of visceral pain have been described. However, a few have been well-established, including intracolonic administration of different active compounds or experimental infection with biological agents. Here we briefly discuss some popular methods used to induce VH in rats and mice.

2.1. Chemical Stimulation-Induced Animal Models

Infusing chemical substances such as acetic acid (AA) into the descending colon and rectum is commonly used to establish VH. The VH in adulthood can be induced by intrarectal infusion of 0.2 mL of 0.5% AA solution in saline in 10 days old pups; the animals develop VH in response to colorectal distension (CRD) in adulthood [19]. Adult rats that underwent colonic installation of a low volume of mustard oil enema neonatally exhibited chronic VH [20]. Intracolonic injection of zymosan suspension induces VH in rats (25 mg/mL; 1 mL) [21] and mice (30 mg/mL, 0.1 mL, daily for 3 days) [22]. The visceromotor response to CRD can be measured either acutely (2–3 h post-infusion) or following a once-daily infusion for 3 days. Dextran sodium sulfate (DSS) is another chemical that induces mucosal colitis in rats or mice when administered as a 1–5% solution with drinking water for 5–10 days [23]. Another model includes the intrarectal injection of 2,4,6-trinitrobenzene sulfonic acid (TNBS) in 25–50% ethanol, producing acute colonic inflammation and disrupting the mucosal barrier in rats and mice [24,25]. These inflammatory changes in the colonic tissue can be assessed within hours of the infusion, and visceral hypersensitivity in response to distension can be measured 3–7 days post-infusion.

2.2. Corticotropin-Releasing Factor (CRF) Induced Animal Models

Corticotropin-releasing factor (CRF) is a crucial regulator of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis. It is involved in stress response in the brain–gut axis and is considered an essential mediator of visceral hypersensitivity. Previous studies reported that microinjection of CRF into the cerebral ventricle or the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) with a dose of 0.1–10 μgkg−1 increased colonic motility, visceral perception, and induced anxiety-like behavior [26,27]. These effects can be blocked by administrating CRF receptor type 1 (CRF-1) antagonist CP-15426 [27] or JTC017 [28]. Moreover, CRF-1 knockout mice have shown decreased colonic sensitivity in response to CRD [29], suggesting the importance of CRF in colonic sensitivity.

2.3. Neonatal Maternal Separation-Induced Models

Stress in early life, including childhood negligence, and physical or sexual abuse, could have detrimental impacts on individuals. Previous evidence suggests that early life stressors like neonatal maternal separation increase the risk of developing IBS in adulthood [30,31]. The most commonly used model involves the separation of neonatal rats from their mother and nest for 3 h daily between postnatal days (PN) 2–14 [32], mimicking the early deprivation of maternal care. These animals exhibited an increased visceromotor response (VMR) to CRD, suggesting that maternal separation caused visceral hypersensitivity in adulthood [32].

2.4. Water Avoidance Stress-Induced Animal Model

Water avoidance stress (WAS) is a non-invasive technique to induce visceral hypersensitivity in rodents. The most conventional approach to constructing this experimental model is to place animals on a dry platform surrounded by water in a plexiglass tank. The animal is placed on the platform for only 1 h (acute stressor) or 1 h daily for 10 consecutive days (chronic stressor). Some studies demonstrated that a single exposure to WAS induced visceral hypersensitivity [33], while other studies have reported that 10 days of consecutive WAS can increase visceral sensitivity in animals [34]. Brain imaging studies demonstrated that rats exposed to chronic WAS had an altered pattern of brain activation similar to that observed in IBS patients [34].

2.5. Biological Agents Induced Animal Model

Chronic and persistent IBS symptoms could develop after the remission of acute intestinal infection, known as post-infectious irritable bowel syndrome. Biological agents such as bacteria or parasites can destroy the balance of intestinal microecology and effectively induce visceral hypersensitivity in rats and mice. Bacterial infection with Citrobacter rodentium (C. Rodentium) caused transient visceral hypersensitivity in mice and persisted for about 2–3 weeks [35]. Trichinella spiralis (T. spiralis) infection is commonly used to produce long-term colonic hypersensitivity in rats and mice. In response to CRD, these animals demonstrated increased EMG and AWR scores in rats [36] and mice [37], respectively.

2.6. Animal Models of Visceral Hypersensitivity Relevant to Functional Dyspepsia

Several rat models of FD have been mentioned previously; however, we will discuss a few of the most popular animal models. Oral gavage of 0.2 mL of 0.1% iodoacetamide in 2% sucrose to male neonatal pups on PN10-16 can induce FD-like responses to gastric balloon distension in adulthood [38]. Administering 0.2 mL of TNBS (130 mg/kg in 10% EtOH in saline) through a tube inserted 2 cm into the distal colon to neonatal rats on PN10 resulted in increased gastric sensitivity in response to stomach distension in adulthood [39]. Another model includes AA (20% AA in sterile saline) injection into the submucosal layer of the gastric wall of adult male rats [40]. However, this method requires surgery and injection at 15–20 sites (10 μL/site).
Although it is challenging to completely mimic visceral pain in animal models, these models provide an opportunity to investigate the visceral pain mechanism in conjunction with the brain–gut axis.
It is worth comparing the differences among different animal models; however, the data is limited to the best of our knowledge as all animal models share the standard mechanisms for inducing VH, although some differences still exist. Herein, we very concisely summarized these observations in Table 1.

3. Brain Regions Involved in Pain Processing

Studies ranging from humans to animals, including neuroimaging, functional, anatomical, and biochemical, suggest the involvement of different brain nuclei in pain processing associated with FGIDs. This section will discuss key brain regions involved in nociception.

3.1. Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC)

To better understand pain perception and develop novel therapies for chronic pain disorders, it is important to exploit the neuronal circuitry associated with pain processing. Research from human and animal studies has emerged to show that the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is a critical brain region necessary for processing the emotional aspects of pain [49,50]. The ACC (Figure 1) is a limbic structure activated in acute and chronic pain. The ACC neurons receive inputs from various cortical and subcortical structures, including the thalamus [50,51,52], the amygdala, and the insular cortex (IC). These inputs convey nociceptive information from somatic and visceral organs to the ACC. Electrophysiological recordings from ACC neurons in humans and experimental animals demonstrated that ACC neurons respond to noxious stimuli and show increased responses to more significant pain intensity. Nociceptive-specific ACC neurons responded to painful somatic thermal and mechanical stimuli; while some neurons had restricted receptive fields, others had more complex responses possibly related to higher integrative or cognitive functions [53]. Similar results have been observed in nonhuman primates and rodent studies [53,54,55,56]. Animal behavioral studies found that inhibition of ACC activity through chemical or electrolytic lesions attenuates the affective component of the pain state [57,58], suggesting the role of ACC in pain perception. However, in the absence of peripheral noxious stimulation, chemical stimulation of the ACC is sufficient to induce pain behavior [57] in rodents. With recent advances in methodological approaches, optogenetics has been used extensively to manipulate specific cell types and circuits. Excitation of ACC pyramidal neurons and activation of the medial thalamus-ACC pathway lowers mechanical pain thresholds in mice [59] and conveys aversive information during chronic pain [60], respectively. By combining optogenetics with fMRI (ofMRI), a recent study in mice revealed that the ACC and its downstream neural circuit are vulnerable to chronic pain. The ACC is also involved in maintaining chronic pain hypersensitivity [61]. Numerous human imaging studies further supported these findings [62,63]. In IBS patients, rectal distension, which induces pronounced pain/urge activation (hyperalgesia), is accompanied by increased activation of the ACC compared with controls [64,65].
Synaptic plasticity, such as long-term potentiation (LTP) and long-term depression (LTD), provides the neural basis for learning and memory [66,67]. Chronic pain has a vital emotional component, and cumulative evidence suggests that plastic changes in the ACC neurons play an important role in chronic pain [68,69]. Different stimulation protocols, including pairing training, the spike-excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP), and theta burst stimulation (TBS), induced LTP in ACC pyramidal neurons [70]. In addition, ACC pyramidal cells undergo rapid and prolonged depolarization in chronic pain model animals suggesting that ACC neurons might be associated with the synaptic mechanisms for pain [71]. The expression of immediate early genes, including c-fos, has been used as a marker for neuronal activation and is associated with the late phase of hippocampal LTP. Rodent studies with chronic inflammatory, neuropathic, and chronic visceral pain demonstrated increased c-fos in the ACC [72,73,74]. These results suggest that changes in synaptic transmission in chronic pain are linked to persistent LTP in the ACC. In summary, these studies indicate that the ACC generates a teaching signal for aversive experiences and mediates the affective/motivational aspects of pain.

3.2. The Amygdala

The amygdala (Figure 2), a limbic brain structure, critically mediates many aspects of emotional responses to various sensory stimuli, including pain [75,76,77]. Pain has a vital emotional component and is significantly associated with adverse effects [78]. The amygdala is made up of several functionally different nuclei, including the lateral (LA), basolateral (BLA), and central (CeA). Clinical neuroimaging data show that the BLA received sensory, including nociceptive, information from the thalamus and cortical areas such as the insula, ACC, and mPFC [79,80] and was activated in both acute and chronic pain [81]. BLA neurons project to the mPFC, and optogenetic manipulation of this circuit modulates both sensory and affective components of pain. The CeA receives nociceptive information from the spinal cord and the pontine parabrachial area (PB), forming a spino-parabrachial-amygdaloid pain pathway [82] and serves primary output functions for amygdala pain neurocircuitry. Both electrophysiological and anatomical studies suggest the involvement of the spino-parabrachio-amygdaloid pathway in the affective, emotional, and autonomic aspects of pain. Both thalamic and cortical sensory information integrate into the amygdala through connections with the LA-BLA nuclei, which then project to the CeA [76,83]. Electrophysiological studies demonstrated increased neuronal excitability in the CeA and BLA neurons [84] in acute arthritis [85,86,87] and the CeA in neuropathic pain [88,89], suggesting the enhanced excitatory synaptic transmission in the pain state of this neurocircuitry. A recent study uncovered the neural circuits that mediate the sensory and emotional aspects of pain by combining elegant techniques, such as viral tracing, optogenetics, fiber photometry, and electrophysiological recordings. The authors demonstrated that while optical activation of the ICBLA pathway is responsible for regulating both the sensory and aversive components of pain, the activation of the MDBLA pathway only contributes to the aversive-affective component of pain [90].
Several lines of evidence suggest the role of the amygdala in modulating visceral pain. Chemical activation of the CeA enhanced visceromotor responses to CRD in rats and caused the sensitization of spinal neurons [91]. In response to noxious stimuli, human IBS patients and rats demonstrated enhanced neuronal activity in the amygdala [92,93] and CeA [94,95], respectively. A recent study using colitis model rats investigated how visceral pain affects the electrophysiological properties of CeA neurons. Whole-cell recordings from these neurons showed enhanced synaptic transmission, as well as direct current injection, increased the frequency of evoked action potentials suggesting a critical role of the CeA in visceral pain. Altogether, these studies support the role of the amygdala in central pain processing.

3.3. Periaqueductal Gray (PAG)

The midbrain periaqueductal gray (PAG; Figure 2) plays a pivotal role in coordinating autonomic, motor, and pain-modulatory responses to relevant environmental stimuli [61,96,97]. The PAG receives selective inputs from the cortical and sub-cortical structures of the brain. Tracing studies from nonhuman primates and rodents revealed that the PAG receives connections from the mPFC [98], ACC [61], motor cortex [97], ventral insula, and amygdala of the brain [99]. Using diffusion tractography, similar functional connections were observed in human studies though not all connections correlate to animal studies [96,100]. Anterograde tracer injections in the PAG confirmed the existence of direct projections to the rostral ventrolateral medulla (RVM) [101,102]. Inputs from nociceptive SDH neurons reach the PAG through the spino-thalamic and spino-mesencephalic pathways [96,103]. In turn, the PAG exerts its pain modulatory effects via its descending projection to the RVM. These findings suggest that the PAG can exert its dual modulatory effect on pain perception through propagating nociceptive and analgesic stimuli [96] and serves as the hub for descending pain control [104,105].
Based on anatomical and functional observations, the PAG has been subdivided into dorsomedial (dmPAG), dorsolateral (dlPAG), lateral (lPAG), and ventrolateral (vlPAG) columns [96,106,107]. Earlier reports indicate that distinct PAG subregions interact with different pain-processing areas suggesting a plastic pain perception mechanism. Either electrical or chemical stimulation of the vlPAG suppresses nociceptive reflexes and elicits analgesia in somatic [108,109,110] and visceral pain animal models [111,112]. In addition, injections of low doses of morphine only in the vlPAG produce morphine-induced analgesia [113,114]. More recently, using ofMRI in mice it was found that the dl/lPAG induces active defensive behaviors against noxious stimuli [61]. Other studies demonstrated that optogenetically activating projections of layer 5 M1 neurons to the lPAG and vlPAG [97] and layer 5 mPFC neurons to the vlPAG [98] attenuated mechanical allodynia and thermal hyperalgesia in neuropathic mice. Dysregulation of the PAG functions is critical for developing and maintaining chronic pain states. Impaired functional connectivity of the PAG was observed in human patients and animal studies with neuropathic pain [115,116,117]. Similarly, enlarged grey matter volume [118,119], increased neuronal activity [120,121], and impaired neurotransmission [112,122,123] in the PAG were also observed in chronic visceral pain studies. Previous functional neuroimaging and electrical microstimulation studies have shown that somatic and visceral painful stimuli elicit diverse patterns of activity in the PAG [124,125,126]. A recent study used c-fos immunolabelling and extracellular microelectrode recording in urethane-anesthetized rats to investigate the colitis-induced changes in visceral pain-related neuronal properties of the PAG and its descending pathway. This study demonstrated diminished activation of the l/vlPAG by noxious CRD, and extracellular recording in the vlPAG revealed a colitis-elicited decrease in the proportion of CRD-excited neurons [127]. These studies suggest the existence of input-specific neural networks in the PAG that can undergo functional changes and contribute to the development of chronic abdominal pain. Altogether, these studies indicate the presence of input-specific neural networks in the PAG. Through both ascending and descending projections, the PAG can undergo functional changes and contribute to the development of chronic abdominal pain.

3.4. Locus Coeruleus (LC)

The brain nucleus locus coeruleus (LC) is located in the dorsolateral pons and is a significant source of norepinephrine (NE) in the brain (Figure 2). Retrograde tracing studies in rats demonstrated that ascending axons of noradrenergic LC neurons project to specific regions of the CNS including the thalamus, mPFC, ACC, hippocampus, hypothalamus, amygdala, and cerebellum [128,129], while descending axons project to the spinal dorsal horn (SDH) [130]. The LC releases NE to modulate nociception by altering the excitability of spinothalamic tract neurons [131,132,133]. These data suggest that LC and sub-coeruleus (SC) regions provide noradrenergic innervation to the forebrain, cerebellum, brainstem, and dorsal and ventral horns of the spinal cord [130,134,135]. Electrical stimulation of LC neurons produces antinociception [136,137,138], and intrathecal injection of noradrenergic antagonists [137,138] blocks these effects. Furthermore, chemical activation of the LC region relieves neuropathic pain [139], suggesting the analgesic role of LC. A recent study used chemogenetic, the Designer Receptors Exclusively Activated by Designer Drugs (DREADD), to activate the LC-SC pathway selectively and explore its effect on neuropathic pain in mice. Chemogenetic activation of the LC-SC pathway increased the release of NE in the SDH and reduced pain intensity in neuropathic mice [140]. This study and other studies also demonstrated that chemogenetic activation of astrocytes reduced neuroinflammation and restored cognitive deficits in VH rats [140,141]. Increased neuronal discharge in the LC was reported in response to visceral stimuli and is associated with cortical EEG activation [142,143]. LC receives multi-synaptic connections from other pelvic visceral organs, including the bladder, urethral sphincter, and kidney, through sympathetic and parasympathetic nerves [144,145,146], suggesting the role of the LC-NE system in pain perception arising from these organs [147,148]. Moreover, CRF microinjection into the rat LC/SC induced a prolonged lasting stimulation of colonic transit and bowel discharge [149] while inhibiting gastric secretion [150]. These observations further suggest the possibility that LC neurons can play a significant role in spinal nociceptive processing [140].
Acupuncture, electrical stimulation at ST 36 acupoint, has been widely used for treating VH in an animal model of FD [151,152] and IBS [153] in human patients. In an unpublished work from our group, we observed that bilateral electrical stimulation at ST36 reduced pain responses in male and female models of IBS rats. Experimental and neuroimaging studies in animals and humans have shown the involvement of many brain structures in the modulation of acupuncture-induced analgesia, including the RVM, PAG, LC, ACC, and the amygdala [154,155,156]. The involvement of these brain regions in pain processing is well documented. It has been shown that spinal α2-adrenoceptors play a crucial role in inhibitory descending pain control by noradrenergic projections from LC to the SDH [157]. A recent report indicated the involvement of spinal α2 receptors in acupuncture-induced analgesia. Altogether, these data support that LC may play a crucial role in the central pain processing mechanism.

3.5. The Hippocampus

In the previous sections, we already summarized that chronic pain reorganizes the structural and functional connections in both cortical and subcortical structures, including the mPFC [81,84], thalamus [158], amygdala [78,84], and ACC [159]. These brain areas are also associated with functions including navigation, learning and memory, fear, and emotional responses. Cognitive and emotional complications, such as anxiety and depression, and deficits in decision-making [160] and working memory [161] are associated with the FGIDs. The hippocampus (Figure 2) is a limbic brain area crucial for declarative memories in humans [162,163], encodes episodic and spatial memories in animals [66,164,165], and is involved in anxiety and depression [166,167]. Hippocampal pyramidal neurons fire action potentials when an animal visits a particular location of its environment. These cells are known as place cells and are thought to provide the basis for an internal representation of space, suggesting the role of the hippocampus in spatial learning and navigation [168,169]. Other studies further supported these findings by demonstrating direct or indirect connections between the hippocampus and the brain areas mentioned earlier [170,171,172,173,174,175,176,177,178,179,180,181]. However, the hippocampus has not yet been the focus of many studies on pain mechanisms.
A previous study suggested that the limbic forebrain structures, including the hippocampus, are responsible for modulating the aversive component of pain [182]. Electrophysiological studies from the hippocampus showed that nociceptive stimulus produces profound and prolonged depression in hippocampal CA1 population spikes [183]. Abnormal hippocampal activities, including short-term [184] and recognition memory deficits [185], are also observed in chronic pain model animals. Additionally, reduced hippocampal volume was observed in human patients with chronic pain [186]. The previous finding suggests that the spinothalamic and parabrachial pathways convey nociceptive information from the periphery to the hippocampus, while the septo-hippocampal pathway transfers these inputs directly from the spinal cord [186]. In summary, the hippocampus works with the ACC, the insula, the amygdala, and the PFC [187] to combine emotional and cognitive aspects of pain perception and may regulate chronic visceral pain in FGID patients [188,189].

4. Electrophysiological Recordings in FGID Model Animals

Converging evidence shows that to understand the pathophysiological basis of pain in FGIDs, it is necessary to precisely decode how the information is processed between the brain–gut axis and across different brain regions. Various methods have been applied to study the pain processing mechanism in the brain; however, the currently available techniques have yet to gain widespread clinical use. Neuroimaging techniques, such as fMRI and PET, measuring indirect neuronal activity, have been widely used to study pain processing. Although these methods have contributed significantly to understanding the pain mechanism, these techniques have a relatively poor temporal resolution. Consequently, a high temporal resolution method, such as electrophysiology (Figure 3), that can directly measure neuronal activity is needed to address pain processing dynamics. Neurons in the brain generate electrical pulses called action potential by integrating electrical inputs from thousands of other cells and performing fast computations that underlie animal behavior. Revealing the behavioral and cognitive relevance of the activity of neurons and their interactions requires monitoring these in the intact brain of behaving animals. Electrophysiology is a uniquely well-suited method combining high spatial and temporal resolutions (~millisecond), enabling us to record the brain’s natural language. Moreover, with ease of application, this user-friendly approach is an attractive tool for awake behavior preparation. In vivo electrophysiological recordings can be performed in anesthetized and awake animals while maintaining their normal behaviors. Recordings in anesthetized animals offer the opportunity to assess local field potentials (LFPs) and multiunit activity (MUA) with a minimum of artifacts at highly defined cortical synchronization states. However, the results also differ to some extent from what can be found in awake subjects. Extracellular microelectrodes are the most widely used tool for recording neuronal activity from the brain. Many variants of extracellular recording techniques are available. Largely these methods can be clustered into single-sited electrodes and multi-sited electrodes. Simultaneous large-scale neuronal population recordings can help to understand the coordinated activity underlying brain computations [190,191,192]. This process requires large dense arrays of recording sites, ideally compatible with freely moving rodents. Several silicone probes are available for chronic recordings [190,193,194]. These probes are designed with dense and extensive recording sites of up to 1024 electrodes to isolate individual neurons across large brain regions with minimal tissue damage. The probes have low noise, resistance to movement artifacts or other interference, and efficient data transmission, enabling us to record stable neuronal activity up to 8–10 weeks after implantation and ensuring low-cost scalable fabrication. The probes are designed to acquire electrophysiological measurements from a large number of neurons with unprecedented detail in freely moving animals. Their lightweight design, small footprint, and integrated fabrication enable the simultaneous monitoring of large populations of neurons from interconnected brain areas and the assessment of the relationship to behavior in normal and pathological conditions, making them ideal tools for recording brain signals from FGID animal models.
Here we summarized previous findings (Table 2) that used extracellular recording methods in animal models of FGIDs. The literature search for this review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement.

Search Strategy

English databases, including PubMed (PM), and Web of Science core collection (WS), were searched for published articles without restricting the year of publication. The following keywords were used in the searching process: (1) visceral pain and extracellular recording in animals (PM; n = 70, WS; n = 14); (2) visceral pain and electrophysiological recordings in functional gastrointestinal disease (PM; n = 8, WS; n = 2), and (3) Electrophysiological recordings in functional gastrointestinal disease (PM; n = 73, WS; n = 10). Moreover, 18 articles were found in the citation search processing.
Inclusion and Exclusion criteria: Based on the focus of our review, we aimed to include studies that performed extracellular recordings from the brain in animal models of FGIDs. The following exclusion criteria were established: (1) studies conducted in human patients; (2) studies involving brain imaging techniques such as fMRI and PET; (3) non-empirical studies, such as editorial letters, conference proceedings, and literature reviews; (4) articles not written in English, or (5) studies performing intracellular recordings.
Selection process: From all search methods, 195 articles were identified. After removing duplicates, the titles and abstracts were retrieved and screened for eligibility according to the exclusion criteria. The number of reports was adjusted to 162, the full texts of the 34 articles were reviewed, and 9 papers matched the requirements and were included for reporting (Figure 4). Extracellular recording in the hippocampus is a well-established method; therefore, we reported a few studies that performed extracellular recordings from the hippocampus in rodents.

5. Insights from Large-Scale Neuronal Recording

Different brain regions are interconnected and must communicate to provide the basis for integrating information critical for learning, memory formation, perception, and the behavior of organisms. Cell assembly theory [201] suggests that changes in synaptic strength mediate this communication through synchronous cell activation. However, recent studies indicate that the interplay and coupling between neural oscillations, recorded by local field potentials (LFPs) [192] and electroencephalography (EEG) [202], provide a key mechanism for the communication between distributed networks in the brain. Neural oscillations are rhythmic or repetitive neural activity in the CNS; they range from slow [203,204] to medium ones, such as theta (4–8 Hz), alpha (8–13 Hz), fast ones, like beta (15–25 Hz), gamma (30–80 Hz), and, the ultra-fast ones (>100 Hz) [205,206,207]. Distinct neural oscillations are associated with different states of the brain; for example, theta oscillations are linked to memory encoding and retrieval [164], while gamma oscillations support cognition through the coupling of functional brain areas during associative learning [208]. Disruption of these brain oscillations is associated with pain perception in humans and model organisms [209,210]. Therefore, these ubiquitous rhythmic processes must be precisely and reliably quantified to understand their role in normal or abnormal brain function.
Brain oscillations are transient and emerge in bursts or packets. The principal approach to studying these oscillations from LFPs involves decomposing these signals into magnitude and phase information for each frequency and characterizing their changes over time (on a millisecond time scale). This approach is commonly used for hunting oscillation bursts in neural data and is known as time-frequency analysis [211,212]. There are many approaches for capturing different aspects of magnitude and phase relationships of neural signals, such as the short-term Fourier transform (STFT) [213], the discrete or continuous wavelet transform, the Hilbert transform, and matching pursuits [214]. Time-frequency analyses of LFPs quantify the power and phase synchrony of specific frequency bands across time and space and provide information about neural synchrony not apparent in the ongoing neural signals.
Communication between selective brain structures is a crucial component of the neural processing underlying cognition [215,216]. Electrophysiological studies suggest that synchronous neural oscillations play a vital role in the flexible routing of information flow in the brain; this is proved by changes in the coherence of LFPs [192,217] and cross-correlated unit activity. In particular, theta rhythms are prominent oscillations recorded in the hippocampus during various locomotor activities such as voluntary, preparatory, orienting, or exploratory and during REM sleep [218]. Theta waves are absent when animals are immobile, but short epochs of theta trains can be elicited by noxious conditioned stimuli [218]. Theta oscillations are present in cortical and subcortical structures, including the entorhinal cortex, perirhinal cortex, ACC, and amygdala [218]. However, these cortical structures are not capable of generating theta activity on their own. Earlier studies demonstrated that theta rhythm is important in forming and retrieving episodic and spatial memory [219]. Despite extensive research on theta oscillations in cognition and memory, clinical studies suggest that chronic pain is associated with abnormal theta oscillatory activities [197,220,221,222]. Power spectral analysis of the resting EEG of neurogenic pain patients exhibited higher resting-EEG power at 2–25 Hz with the maximum difference in the theta frequency band [221]. In addition, a higher baseline level of delta and theta EEG oscillations was observed in patients with visceral [223] and somatic pain syndromes [224]. Alternations of these oscillatory activities in chronic pain states indicate disruption of local or long-range communication between functionally specialized neuronal assemblies.

6. Concluding Remarks and Future Directions

Increasing evidence strongly indicates that the crosstalk between the gut and brain is important for understanding visceral pain pathophysiology in FGIDs. However, the mechanisms by which these regions communicate are still in their early infancy. The brain receives noxious pain stimuli through anatomically and functionally distinct medial and lateral pain pathways. The lateral (lateral thalamusS1) pathway encodes sensory–discriminative attribution of nociception. The medial (MDACC) pain system contributes to the motivational–affective component of pain arising from deep somatic and visceral structures. In chronic pain states, both pain pathways are known to be disrupted. Human and animal studies suggest that disruption of brain oscillatory activity is associated with neurological and GI disorders. However, the precise mechanisms underlying the disturbances of the rhythm coherence in FGIDs still need to be better understood.
The role of theta oscillations in cognition is widely accepted, and emerging evidence suggests pain specific ongoing activity in the theta band. Therefore, theta oscillation dynamics can serve as a basis for decoding pain sensation. Future works in this field are beneficial for identifying the oscillatory basis of pain perception in FGIDs and provide a deeper understanding of the nociceptive systems in these disorders. Electrophysiological methods such as large-scale neuronal population recordings could be suitable for studying pain mechanisms because of their relatively low cost, high temporal resolution, and ease of use compared to other neuroimaging techniques. In clinical practice, this also offers exciting prospects for investigating pathological mechanisms of visceral pain in FGIDs, thus promoting the development of a rational therapeutic strategy.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.J.A. and J.D.Z.C.; writing—original draft preparation, M.J.A.; writing—review and editing, J.D.Z.C.; supervision, J.D.Z.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was partially supported by grants from the National Institute of Health (UG3NS115108, R01DK107754, and R01AT011665).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

ACCAnterior cingulate cortex
BLABasolateral amygdala
CeACentral nucleus of the amygdala
CRDColorectal distension
EEGElectroencephalography
FDFunctional dyspepsia
FGIDsFunctional gastrointestinal disorders
fMRIFunctional magnetic resonance imaging
GIGastrointestinal
ICInsular cortex
IBSIrritable bowel syndrome
LALateral amygdala
LFPsLocal field potentials
LCLocus coeruleus
LTDLong-term depression
LTPLong-term potentiation
MEGMagnetoencephalography
mPFCMedial prefrontal cortex
MUAMultiunit activity
NENorepinephrine
PBParabrachial area
PAGPeriaqueductal gray
PETPositron emission tomography
RVMRostral ventrolateral medulla
SDHSpinal dorsal horn
VHVisceral hypersensitivity
SCSubcoeruleus

References

  1. Sandler, R.S. Epidemiology of irritable bowel syndrome in the United States. Gastroenterology 1990, 99, 409–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Verne, G.N.; Cerda, J.J. Irritable bowel syndrome. Streamlining the diagnosis. Postgrad. Med. 1997, 102, 197–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Bernstein, C.N. The Brain–gut Axis and Stress in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Gastroenterol. Clin. N. Am. 2017, 46, 839–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Labanski, A.; Langhorst, J.; Engler, H.; Elsenbruch, S. Stress and the brain–gut axis in functional and chronic-inflammatory gastrointestinal diseases: A transdisciplinary challenge. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2020, 111, 104501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Ohlmann, H.; Koenen, L.R.; Labrenz, F.; Engler, H.; Theysohn, N.; Langhorst, J.; Elsenbruch, S. Altered Brain Structure in Chronic Visceral Pain: Specific Differences in Gray Matter Volume and Associations With Visceral Symptoms and Chronic Stress. Front. Neurol. 2021, 12, 733035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Collins, S.M. Interrogating the Gut-Brain Axis in the Context of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Translational Approach. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2020, 26, 493–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Koloski, N.A.; Jones, M.; Kalantar, J.; Weltman, M.; Zaguirre, J.; Talley, N.J. The brain--gut pathway in functional gastrointestinal disorders is bidirectional: A 12-year prospective population-based study. Gut 2012, 61, 1284–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Mayer, E.A.; Tillisch, K. The brain–gut axis in abdominal pain syndromes. Annu. Rev. Med. 2011, 62, 381–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hubbard, C.S.; Hong, J.; Jiang, Z.; Ebrat, B.; Suyenobu, B.; Smith, S.; Heendeniya, N.; Naliboff, B.D.; Tillisch, K.; Mayer, E.A.; et al. Increased attentional network functioning related to symptom severity measures in females with irritable bowel syndrome. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2015, 27, 1282–1294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wong, R.K.; Van Oudenhove, L.; Li, X.; Cao, Y.; Ho, K.Y.; Wilder-Smith, C.H. Visceral pain perception in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and healthy volunteers is affected by the MRI scanner environment. United Eur. Gastroenterol. J. 2016, 4, 132–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Hubbard, C.S.; Labus, J.S.; Bueller, J.; Stains, J.; Suyenobu, B.; Dukes, G.E.; Kelleher, D.L.; Tillisch, K.; Naliboff, B.D.; Mayer, E.A. Corticotropin-releasing factor receptor 1 antagonist alters regional activation and effective connectivity in an emotional-arousal circuit during expectation of abdominal pain. J. Neurosci. 2011, 31, 12491–12500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Berman, S.; Suyenobu, B.; Naliboff, B.D.; Bueller, J.; Stains, J.; Wong, H.; Mandelkern, M.; Fitzgerald, L.; Ohning, G.; Gupta, A.; et al. Evidence for alterations in central noradrenergic signaling in irritable bowel syndrome. Neuroimage 2012, 63, 1854–1863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mesulam, M.M. From sensation to cognition. Brain 1998, 121 Pt 6, 1013–1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Nakai, A.; Kumakura, Y.; Boivin, M.; Rosa, P.; Diksic, M.; D’Souza, D.; Kersey, K. Sex differences of brain serotonin synthesis in patients with irritable bowel syndrome using alpha-[11C]methyl-L-tryptophan, positron emission tomography and statistical parametric mapping. Can. J. Gastroenterol. 2003, 17, 191–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Naliboff, B.D.; Berman, S.; Suyenobu, B.; Labus, J.S.; Chang, L.; Stains, J.; Mandelkern, M.A.; Mayer, E.A. Longitudinal change in perceptual and brain activation response to visceral stimuli in irritable bowel syndrome patients. Gastroenterology 2006, 131, 352–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Lee, H.F.; Hsieh, J.C.; Lu, C.L.; Yeh, T.C.; Tu, C.H.; Cheng, C.M.; Niddam, D.M.; Lin, H.C.; Lee, F.Y.; Chang, F.Y. Enhanced affect/cognition-related brain responses during visceral placebo analgesia in irritable bowel syndrome patients. Pain 2012, 153, 1301–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Vandenberghe, J.; Dupont, P.; Van Oudenhove, L.; Bormans, G.; Demyttenaere, K.; Fischler, B.; Geeraerts, B.; Janssens, J.; Tack, J. Regional cerebral blood flow during gastric balloon distention in functional dyspepsia. Gastroenterology 2007, 132, 1684–1693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhou, G.; Qin, W.; Zeng, F.; Liu, P.; Yang, X.; von Deneen, K.M.; Gong, Q.; Liang, F.; Tian, J. White-matter microstructural changes in functional dyspepsia: A diffusion tensor imaging study. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2013, 108, 260–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Winston, J.; Shenoy, M.; Medley, D.; Naniwadekar, A.; Pasricha, P.J. The vanilloid receptor initiates and maintains colonic hypersensitivity induced by neonatal colon irritation in rats. Gastroenterology 2007, 132, 615–627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Al-Chaer, E.D.; Kawasaki, M.; Pasricha, P.J. A new model of chronic visceral hypersensitivity in adult rats induced by colon irritation during postnatal development. Gastroenterology 2000, 119, 1276–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Coutinho, S.V.; Meller, S.T.; Gebhart, G.F. Intracolonic zymosan produces visceral hyperalgesia in the rat that is mediated by spinal NMDA and non-NMDA receptors. Brain Res. 1996, 736, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Shinoda, M.; Feng, B.; Gebhart, G.F. Peripheral and central P2X receptor contributions to colon mechanosensitivity and hypersensitivity in the mouse. Gastroenterology 2009, 137, 2096–2104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Okayasu, I.; Hatakeyama, S.; Yamada, M.; Ohkusa, T.; Inagaki, Y.; Nakaya, R. A novel method in the induction of reliable experimental acute and chronic ulcerative colitis in mice. Gastroenterology 1990, 98, 694–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Guo, J.; Jin, H.; Shi, Z.; Yin, J.; Pasricha, T.; Chen, J.D.Z. Sacral nerve stimulation improves colonic inflammation mediated by autonomic-inflammatory cytokine mechanism in rats. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2019, 31, e13676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. te Velde, A.A.; Verstege, M.I.; Hommes, D.W. Critical appraisal of the current practice in murine TNBS-induced colitis. Inflamm. Bowel Dis. 2006, 12, 995–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Gue, M.; Del Rio-Lacheze, C.; Eutamene, H.; Theodorou, V.; Fioramonti, J.; Bueno, L. Stress-induced visceral hypersensitivity to rectal distension in rats: Role of CRF and mast cells. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 1997, 9, 271–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Su, J.; Tanaka, Y.; Muratsubaki, T.; Kano, M.; Kanazawa, M.; Fukudo, S. Injection of corticotropin-releasing hormone into the amygdala aggravates visceral nociception and induces noradrenaline release in rats. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2015, 27, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Saito, K.; Kasai, T.; Nagura, Y.; Ito, H.; Kanazawa, M.; Fukudo, S. Corticotropin-releasing hormone receptor 1 antagonist blocks brain–gut activation induced by colonic distention in rats. Gastroenterology 2005, 129, 1533–1543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Trimble, N.; Johnson, A.C.; Foster, A.; Greenwood-van Meerveld, B. Corticotropin-releasing factor receptor 1-deficient mice show decreased anxiety and colonic sensitivity. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2007, 19, 754–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bradford, K.; Shih, W.; Videlock, E.J.; Presson, A.P.; Naliboff, B.D.; Mayer, E.A.; Chang, L. Association between early adverse life events and irritable bowel syndrome. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2012, 10, 385–390.e381-383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Larauche, M.; Mulak, A.; Tache, Y. Stress-related alterations of visceral sensation: Animal models for irritable bowel syndrome study. J. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2011, 17, 213–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Coutinho, S.V.; Plotsky, P.M.; Sablad, M.; Miller, J.C.; Zhou, H.; Bayati, A.I.; McRoberts, J.A.; Mayer, E.A. Neonatal maternal separation alters stress-induced responses to viscerosomatic nociceptive stimuli in rat. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 2002, 282, G307–G316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Myers, B.; Greenwood-Van Meerveld, B. Differential involvement of amygdala corticosteroid receptors in visceral hyperalgesia following acute or repeated stress. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 2012, 302, G260–G266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wang, J.; Zhang, X.; Cao, B.; Liu, J.; Li, Y. Facilitation of synaptic transmission in the anterior cingulate cortex in viscerally hypersensitive rats. Cereb. Cortex 2015, 25, 859–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mondelaers, S.U.; Theofanous, S.A.; Florens, M.V.; Perna, E.; Aguilera-Lizarraga, J.; Boeckxstaens, G.E.; Wouters, M.M. Effect of genetic background and postinfectious stress on visceral sensitivity in Citrobacter rodentium-infected mice. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2016, 28, 647–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Yang, X.; Sheng, L.; Guan, Y.; Qian, W.; Hou, X. Synaptic plasticity: The new explanation of visceral hypersensitivity in rats with Trichinella spiralis infection? Dig. Dis. Sci. 2009, 54, 937–946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Long, Y.; Wang, W.; Wang, H.; Hao, L.; Qian, W.; Hou, X. Characteristics of intestinal lamina propria dendritic cells in a mouse model of postinfectious irritable bowel syndrome. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2012, 27, 935–944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Liu, L.S.; Winston, J.H.; Shenoy, M.M.; Song, G.Q.; Chen, J.D.; Pasricha, P.J. A rat model of chronic gastric sensorimotor dysfunction resulting from transient neonatal gastric irritation. Gastroenterology 2008, 134, 2070–2079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Winston, J.H.; Sarna, S.K. Developmental origins of functional dyspepsia-like gastric hypersensitivity in rats. Gastroenterology 2013, 144, 570–579.e573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dai, F.; Lei, Y.; Li, S.; Song, G.; Chen, J.D. Desvenlafaxine succinate ameliorates visceral hypersensitivity but delays solid gastric emptying in rats. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 2013, 305, G333–G339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Hong, S.S.; Zheng, G.; Wu, X.Y.; Snider, N.T.; Owyang, C.; Wiley, J.W. Corticosterone Mediates Reciprocal Changes in CB 1 and TRPV1 Receptors in Primary Sensory Neurons in the Chronically Stressed Rat. Gastroenterology 2011, 140, 627–U371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Hong, S.S.; Zheng, G.; Wiley, J.W. Epigenetic Regulation of Genes That Modulate Chronic Stress-Induced Visceral Pain in the Peripheral Nervous System. Gastroenterology 2015, 148, 148–U591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Zhu, L.; Zhao, L.; Qu, R.; Zhu, H.-Y.; Wang, Y.; Jiang, X.; Xu, G.-Y. Adrenergic stimulation sensitizes TRPV1 through upregulation of cystathionine β-synthetase in a rat model of visceral hypersensitivity. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 16109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Zhao, J.; Li, H.; Shi, C.; Yang, T.; Xu, B. Electroacupuncture Inhibits the Activity of Astrocytes in Spinal Cord in Rats with Visceral Hypersensitivity by Inhibiting P2Y1 Receptor-Mediated MAPK/ERK Signaling Pathway. Evid.-Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2020, 2020, 4956179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Xu, G.Y.; Shenoy, M.; Winston, J.H.; Mittal, S.; Pasricha, P.J. P2X receptor-mediated visceral hyperalgesia in a rat model of chronic visceral hypersensitivity. Gut 2008, 57, 1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Hu, S.; Sun, Q.; Du, W.J.; Song, J.; Li, X.; Zhang, P.A.; Xu, J.T.; Xu, G.Y. Adult Stress Promotes Purinergic Signaling to Induce Visceral Pain in Rats with Neonatal Maternal Deprivation. Neurosci. Bull. 2020, 36, 1271–1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Salameh, E.; Meleine, M.; Gourcerol, G.; do Rego, J.C.; do Rego, J.L.; Legrand, R.; Breton, J.; Aziz, M.; Guerin, C.; Coeffier, M.; et al. Chronic colitis-induced visceral pain is associated with increased anxiety during quiescent phase. Am. J. Physiol. Gastrointest. Liver Physiol. 2019, 316, G692–G700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Xu, Q.Y.; Zhang, H.L.; Du, H.; Li, Y.C.; Ji, F.H.; Li, R.; Xu, G.Y. Identification of a Glutamatergic Claustrum-Anterior Cingulate Cortex Circuit for Visceral Pain Processing. J. Neurosci. 2022, 42, 8154–8168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Eisenberger, N.I.; Lieberman, M.D.; Williams, K.D. Does rejection hurt? An FMRI study of social exclusion. Science 2003, 302, 290–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Vogt, B.A. Pain and emotion interactions in subregions of the cingulate gyrus. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2005, 6, 533–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Bliss, T.V.; Collingridge, G.L.; Kaang, B.K.; Zhuo, M. Synaptic plasticity in the anterior cingulate cortex in acute and chronic pain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2016, 17, 485–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Shyu, B.C.; Vogt, B.A. Short-term synaptic plasticity in the nociceptive thalamic-anterior cingulate pathway. Mol. Pain 2009, 5, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Hutchison, W.D.; Davis, K.D.; Lozano, A.M.; Tasker, R.R.; Dostrovsky, J.O. Pain-related neurons in the human cingulate cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 1999, 2, 403–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Iwata, K.; Kamo, H.; Ogawa, A.; Tsuboi, Y.; Noma, N.; Mitsuhashi, Y.; Taira, M.; Koshikawa, N.; Kitagawa, J. Anterior cingulate cortical neuronal activity during perception of noxious thermal stimuli in monkeys. J. Neurophysiol. 2005, 94, 1980–1991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Koga, K.; Li, X.; Chen, T.; Steenland, H.W.; Descalzi, G.; Zhuo, M. In vivo whole-cell patch-clamp recording of sensory synaptic responses of cingulate pyramidal neurons to noxious mechanical stimuli in adult mice. Mol. Pain 2010, 6, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Yamamura, H.; Iwata, K.; Tsuboi, Y.; Toda, K.; Kitajima, K.; Shimizu, N.; Nomura, H.; Hibiya, J.; Fujita, S.; Sumino, R. Morphological and electrophysiological properties of ACCx nociceptive neurons in rats. Brain Res. 1996, 735, 83–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Johansen, J.P.; Fields, H.L. Glutamatergic activation of anterior cingulate cortex produces an aversive teaching signal. Nat. Neurosci. 2004, 7, 398–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Johansen, J.P.; Fields, H.L.; Manning, B.H. The affective component of pain in rodents: Direct evidence for a contribution of the anterior cingulate cortex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2001, 98, 8077–8082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Kang, S.J.; Kwak, C.; Lee, J.; Sim, S.E.; Shim, J.; Choi, T.; Collingridge, G.L.; Zhuo, M.; Kaang, B.K. Bidirectional modulation of hyperalgesia via the specific control of excitatory and inhibitory neuronal activity in the ACC. Mol. Brain 2015, 8, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Meda, K.S.; Patel, T.; Braz, J.M.; Malik, R.; Turner, M.L.; Seifikar, H.; Basbaum, A.I.; Sohal, V.S. Microcircuit Mechanisms through which Mediodorsal Thalamic Input to Anterior Cingulate Cortex Exacerbates Pain-Related Aversion. Neuron 2019, 102, 944–959.e943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lee, J.Y.; You, T.; Lee, C.H.; Im, G.H.; Seo, H.; Woo, C.W.; Kim, S.G. Role of anterior cingulate cortex inputs to periaqueductal gray for pain avoidance. Curr. Biol. 2022, 32, 2834–2847.e2835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Rainville, P.; Duncan, G.H.; Price, D.D.; Carrier, B.; Bushnell, M.C. Pain affect encoded in human anterior cingulate but not somatosensory cortex. Science 1997, 277, 968–971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Tolle, T.R.; Kaufmann, T.; Siessmeier, T.; Lautenbacher, S.; Berthele, A.; Munz, F.; Zieglgansberger, W.; Willoch, F.; Schwaiger, M.; Conrad, B.; et al. Region-specific encoding of sensory and affective components of pain in the human brain: A positron emission tomography correlation analysis. Ann. Neurol. 1999, 45, 40–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Mertz, H.; Morgan, V.; Tanner, G.; Pickens, D.; Price, R.; Shyr, Y.; Kessler, R. Regional cerebral activation in irritable bowel syndrome and control subjects with painful and nonpainful rectal distention. Gastroenterology 2000, 118, 842–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Morgan, V.; Pickens, D.; Gautam, S.; Kessler, R.; Mertz, H. Amitriptyline reduces rectal pain related activation of the anterior cingulate cortex in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Gut 2005, 54, 601–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Alam, M.J.; Kitamura, T.; Saitoh, Y.; Ohkawa, N.; Kondo, T.; Inokuchi, K. Adult Neurogenesis Conserves Hippocampal Memory Capacity. J. Neurosci. 2018, 38, 6854–6863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Nabavi, S.; Fox, R.; Proulx, C.D.; Lin, J.Y.; Tsien, R.Y.; Malinow, R. Engineering a memory with LTD and LTP. Nature 2014, 511, 348–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Sandkuhler, J. Understanding LTP in pain pathways. Mol. Pain 2007, 3, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Zhuo, M. Cortical excitation and chronic pain. Trends Neurosci. 2008, 31, 199–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Zhao, M.G.; Toyoda, H.; Lee, Y.S.; Wu, L.J.; Ko, S.W.; Zhang, X.H.; Jia, Y.; Shum, F.; Xu, H.; Li, B.M.; et al. Roles of NMDA NR2B subtype receptor in prefrontal long-term potentiation and contextual fear memory. Neuron 2005, 47, 859–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Wu, M.F.; Pang, Z.P.; Zhuo, M.; Xu, Z.C. Prolonged membrane potential depolarization in cingulate pyramidal cells after digit amputation in adult rats. Mol. Pain 2005, 1, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Chen, T.; Koga, K.; Descalzi, G.; Qiu, S.; Wang, J.; Zhang, L.S.; Zhang, Z.J.; He, X.B.; Qin, X.; Xu, F.Q.; et al. Postsynaptic potentiation of corticospinal projecting neurons in the anterior cingulate cortex after nerve injury. Mol. Pain 2014, 10, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Wei, F.; Li, P.; Zhuo, M. Loss of synaptic depression in mammalian anterior cingulate cortex after amputation. J. Neurosci. 1999, 19, 9346–9354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Wei, F.; Zhuo, M. Activation of Erk in the anterior cingulate cortex during the induction and expression of chronic pain. Mol. Pain 2008, 4, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Davis, M. Anatomic and physiologic substrates of emotion in an animal model. J. Clin. Neurophysiol. 1998, 15, 378–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. LeDoux, J.E. Emotion circuits in the brain. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 2000, 23, 155–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Zald, D.H. The human amygdala and the emotional evaluation of sensory stimuli. Brain Res. Brain Res. Rev. 2003, 41, 88–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Han, J.S.; Neugebauer, V. Synaptic plasticity in the amygdala in a visceral pain model in rats. Neurosci. Lett. 2004, 361, 254–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Marek, R.; Strobel, C.; Bredy, T.W.; Sah, P. The amygdala and medial prefrontal cortex: Partners in the fear circuit. J. Physiol. 2013, 591, 2381–2391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Orsini, C.A.; Maren, S. Neural and cellular mechanisms of fear and extinction memory formation. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2012, 36, 1773–1802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Baliki, M.N.; Chialvo, D.R.; Geha, P.Y.; Levy, R.M.; Harden, R.N.; Parrish, T.B.; Apkarian, A.V. Chronic pain and the emotional brain: Specific brain activity associated with spontaneous fluctuations of intensity of chronic back pain. J. Neurosci. 2006, 26, 12165–12173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Bernard, J.F.; Bester, H.; Besson, J.M. Involvement of the spino-parabrachio -amygdaloid and -hypothalamic pathways in the autonomic and affective emotional aspects of pain. Prog. Brain Res. 1996, 107, 243–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Pitkanen, A.; Savander, V.; LeDoux, J.E. Organization of intra-amygdaloid circuitries in the rat: An emerging framework for understanding functions of the amygdala. Trends Neurosci. 1997, 20, 517–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Ji, G.; Sun, H.; Fu, Y.; Li, Z.; Pais-Vieira, M.; Galhardo, V.; Neugebauer, V. Cognitive impairment in pain through amygdala-driven prefrontal cortical deactivation. J. Neurosci. 2010, 30, 5451–5464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Neugebauer, V. Amygdala pain mechanisms. Handb. Exp. Pharmacol. 2015, 227, 261–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Neugebauer, V.; Li, W.; Bird, G.C.; Bhave, G.; Gereau, R.W.t. Synaptic plasticity in the amygdala in a model of arthritic pain: Differential roles of metabotropic glutamate receptors 1 and 5. J. Neurosci. 2003, 23, 52–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Veinante, P.; Yalcin, I.; Barrot, M. The amygdala between sensation and affect: A role in pain. J. Mol. Psychiatry 2013, 1, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ikeda, R.; Takahashi, Y.; Inoue, K.; Kato, F. NMDA receptor-independent synaptic plasticity in the central amygdala in the rat model of neuropathic pain. Pain 2007, 127, 161–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Nakao, A.; Takahashi, Y.; Nagase, M.; Ikeda, R.; Kato, F. Role of capsaicin-sensitive C-fiber afferents in neuropathic pain-induced synaptic potentiation in the nociceptive amygdala. Mol. Pain 2012, 8, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Meng, X.; Yue, L.; Liu, A.; Tao, W.; Shi, L.; Zhao, W.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, L.; Zhang, X.; et al. Distinct basolateral amygdala excitatory inputs mediate the somatosensory and aversive-affective components of pain. J. Biol. Chem. 2022, 298, 102207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Qin, C.; Greenwood-Van Meerveld, B.; Foreman, R.D. Visceromotor and spinal neuronal responses to colorectal distension in rats with aldosterone onto the amygdala. J. Neurophysiol. 2003, 90, 2–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Bonaz, B.; Baciu, M.; Papillon, E.; Bost, R.; Gueddah, N.; Le Bas, J.F.; Fournet, J.; Segebarth, C. Central processing of rectal pain in patients with irritable bowel syndrome: An fMRI study. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2002, 97, 654–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Naliboff, B.D.; Berman, S.; Chang, L.; Derbyshire, S.W.; Suyenobu, B.; Vogt, B.A.; Mandelkern, M.; Mayer, E.A. Sex-related differences in IBS patients: Central processing of visceral stimuli. Gastroenterology 2003, 124, 1738–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Nakagawa, T.; Katsuya, A.; Tanimoto, S.; Yamamoto, J.; Yamauchi, Y.; Minami, M.; Satoh, M. Differential patterns of c-fos mRNA expression in the amygdaloid nuclei induced by chemical somatic and visceral noxious stimuli in rats. Neurosci. Lett. 2003, 344, 197–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Traub, R.J.; Sengupta, J.N.; Gebhart, G.F. Differential c-fos expression in the nucleus of the solitary tract and spinal cord following noxious gastric distention in the rat. Neuroscience 1996, 74, 873–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Benarroch, E.E. Periaqueductal gray: An interface for behavioral control. Neurology 2012, 78, 210–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Gan, Z.; Gangadharan, V.; Liu, S.; Korber, C.; Tan, L.L.; Li, H.; Oswald, M.J.; Kang, J.; Martin-Cortecero, J.; Mannich, D.; et al. Layer-specific pain relief pathways originating from primary motor cortex. Science 2022, 378, 1336–1343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Huang, J.; Gadotti, V.M.; Chen, L.; Souza, I.A.; Huang, S.; Wang, D.; Ramakrishnan, C.; Deisseroth, K.; Zhang, Z.; Zamponi, G.W. A neuronal circuit for activating descending modulation of neuropathic pain. Nat. Neurosci. 2019, 22, 1659–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. An, X.; Bandler, R.; Öngür, D.; Price, J.L. Prefrontal cortical projections to longitudinal columns in the midbrain periaqueductal gray in Macaque monkeys. J. Comp. Neurol. 1998, 401, 455–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Ezra, M.; Faull, O.K.; Jbabdi, S.; Pattinson, K.T. Connectivity-based segmentation of the periaqueductal gray matter in human with brainstem optimized diffusion MRI. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2015, 36, 3459–3471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Chen, S.; Aston-Jones, G. Extensive projections from the midbrain periaqueductal gray to the caudal ventrolateral medulla: A retrograde and anterograde tracing study in the rat. Neuroscience 1996, 71, 443–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Morgan, M.M.; Whittier, K.L.; Hegarty, D.M.; Aicher, S.A. Periaqueductal gray neurons project to spinally projecting GABAergic neurons in the rostral ventromedial medulla. Pain 2008, 140, 376–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Almeida, T.F.; Roizenblatt, S.; Tufik, S. Afferent pain pathways: A neuroanatomical review. Brain Res. 2004, 1000, 40–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Benarroch, E.E. Descending monoaminergic pain modulation: Bidirectional control and clinical relevance. Neurology 2008, 71, 217–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Stamford, J.A. Descending control of pain. Br. J. Anaesth. 1995, 75, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Bandler, R.; Shipley, M.T. Columnar organization in the midbrain periaqueductal gray: Modules for emotional expression? Trends Neurosci. 1994, 17, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Carrive, P. The periaqueductal gray and defensive behavior: Functional representation and neuronal organization. Behav. Brain Res. 1993, 58, 27–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Meyer, P.J.; Morgan, M.M.; Kozell, L.B.; Ingram, S.L. Contribution of dopamine receptors to periaqueductal gray-mediated antinociception. Psychopharmacology 2009, 204, 531–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Roychowdhury, S.M.; Fields, H.L. Endogenous opioids acting at a medullary mu-opioid receptor contribute to the behavioral antinociception produced by GABA antagonism in the midbrain periaqueductal gray. Neuroscience 1996, 74, 863–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Samineni, V.K.; Grajales-Reyes, J.G.; Copits, B.A.; O’Brien, D.E.; Trigg, S.L.; Gomez, A.M.; Bruchas, M.R.; Gereau, R.W. Divergent Modulation of Nociception by Glutamatergic and GABAergic Neuronal Subpopulations in the Periaqueductal Gray. eNeuro 2017, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. Giesler, G.J., Jr.; Liebeskind, J.C. Inhibition of visceral pain by electrical stimulation of the periaqueductal gray matter. Pain 1976, 2, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Wan, J.; Ding, Y.; Tahir, A.H.; Shah, M.K.; Janyaro, H.; Li, X.; Zhong, J.; Vodyanoy, V.; Ding, M. Electroacupuncture Attenuates Visceral Hypersensitivity by Inhibiting JAK2/STAT3 Signaling Pathway in the Descending Pain Modulation System. Front. Neurosci. 2017, 11, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Lewis, V.A.; Gebhart, G.F. Evaluation of the periaqueductal central gray (PAG) as a morphine-specific locus of action and examination of morphine-induced and stimulation-produced analgesia at coincident PAG loci. Brain Res. 1977, 124, 283–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Morgan, M.M. Differences in Antinociception Evoked from Dorsal and Ventral Regions of the Caudal Periaqueductal Gray Matter. In The Midbrain Periaqueductal Gray Matter: Functional, Anatomical, and Neurochemical Organization; Depaulis, A., Bandler, R., Eds.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 1991; pp. 139–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Keay, K.A.; Bandler, R. Parallel circuits mediating distinct emotional coping reactions to different types of stress. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2001, 25, 669–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Samineni, V.K.; Mickle, A.D.; Yoon, J.; Grajales-Reyes, J.G.; Pullen, M.Y.; Crawford, K.E.; Noh, K.N.; Gereau, G.B.; Vogt, S.K.; Lai, H.H.; et al. Optogenetic silencing of nociceptive primary afferents reduces evoked and ongoing bladder pain. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 15865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Yu, R.; Gollub, R.L.; Spaeth, R.; Napadow, V.; Wasan, A.; Kong, J. Disrupted functional connectivity of the periaqueductal gray in chronic low back pain. Neuroimage Clin. 2014, 6, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Bao, C.H.; Liu, P.; Liu, H.R.; Wu, L.Y.; Shi, Y.; Chen, W.F.; Qin, W.; Lu, Y.; Zhang, J.Y.; Jin, X.M.; et al. Alterations in brain grey matter structures in patients with crohn’s disease and their correlation with psychological distress. J. Crohns Colitis 2015, 9, 532–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Luczynski, P.; Tramullas, M.; Viola, M.; Shanahan, F.; Clarke, G.; O’Mahony, S.; Dinan, T.G.; Cryan, J.F. Microbiota regulates visceral pain in the mouse. eLife 2017, 6, e25887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Welch, M.G.; Welch-Horan, T.B.; Anwar, M.; Anwar, N.; Ludwig, R.J.; Ruggiero, D.A. Brain effects of chronic IBD in areas abnormal in autism and treatment by single neuropeptides secretin and oxytocin. J. Mol. Neurosci. 2005, 25, 259–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Zhang, M.M.; Liu, S.B.; Chen, T.; Koga, K.; Zhang, T.; Li, Y.Q.; Zhuo, M. Effects of NB001 and gabapentin on irritable bowel syndrome-induced behavioral anxiety and spontaneous pain. Mol. Brain 2014, 7, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Ko, C.Y.; Yang, Y.B.; Chou, D.; Xu, J.H. The Ventrolateral Periaqueductal Gray Contributes to Depressive-Like Behaviors in Recovery of Inflammatory Bowel Disease Rat Model. Front. Neurosci. 2020, 14, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Liu, Q.; Ko, C.Y.; Zheng, C.; Ye, L.; Liu, B.; Gao, H.; Huang, D.; Chou, D. Decreased Glutamatergic Synaptic Strength in the Periaqueductal Gray Contributes to Maintenance of Visceral Pain in Male Rats with Experimental Pancreatitis. Neuroscience 2020, 428, 60–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Clement, C.I.; Keay, K.A.; Podzebenko, K.; Gordon, B.D.; Bandler, R. Spinal sources of noxious visceral and noxious deep somatic afferent drive onto the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray of the rat. J. Comp. Neurol. 2000, 425, 323–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Dunckley, P.; Wise, R.G.; Fairhurst, M.; Hobden, P.; Aziz, Q.; Chang, L.; Tracey, I. A comparison of visceral and somatic pain processing in the human brainstem using functional magnetic resonance imaging. J. Neurosci. 2005, 25, 7333–7341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Han, F.; Zhang, Y.F.; Li, Y.Q. Fos expression in tyrosine hydroxylase-containing neurons in rat brainstem after visceral noxious stimulation: An immunohistochemical study. World J. Gastroenterol. 2003, 9, 1045–1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Lyubashina, O.A.; Sivachenko, I.B.; Mikhalkin, A.A. Impaired visceral pain-related functions of the midbrain periaqueductal gray in rats with colitis. Brain Res. Bull. 2022, 182, 12–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Berridge, C.W.; Waterhouse, B.D. The locus coeruleus-noradrenergic system: Modulation of behavioral state and state-dependent cognitive processes. Brain Res. Brain Res. Rev. 2003, 42, 33–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Mason, S.T.; Fibiger, H.C. Regional topography within noradrenergic locus coeruleus as revealed by retrograde transport of horseradish peroxidase. J. Comp. Neurol. 1979, 187, 703–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Proudfit, H.K.; Clark, F.M. The projections of locus coeruleus neurons to the spinal cord. Prog. Brain Res. 1991, 88, 123–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Carstens, E.; Trevino, D.L. Anatomical and physiological properties of ipsilaterally projecting spinothalamic neurons in the second cervical segment of the cat’s spinal cord. J. Comp. Neurol. 1978, 182, 167–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Trevino, D.L.; Maunz, R.A.; Bryan, R.N.; Willis, W.D. Location of cells of origin of the spinothalamic tract in the lumbar enlargement of cat. Exp. Neurol. 1972, 34, 64–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Willis, W.D.; Trevino, D.L.; Coulter, J.D.; Maunz, R.A. Responses of primate spinothalamic tract neurons to natural stimulation of hindlimb. J. Neurophysiol. 1974, 37, 358–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Clark, F.M.; Proudfit, H.K. The projection of noradrenergic neurons in the A7 catecholamine cell group to the spinal cord in the rat demonstrated by anterograde tracing combined with immunocytochemistry. Brain Res. 1991, 547, 279–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Sluka, K.A.; Westlund, K.N. Spinal projections of the locus coeruleus and the nucleus subcoeruleus in the Harlan and the Sasco Sprague-Dawley rat. Brain Res. 1992, 579, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Janss, A.J.; Jones, S.L.; Gebhart, G.F. Effect of spinal norepinephrine depletion on descending inhibition of the tail flick reflex from the locus coeruleus and lateral reticular nucleus in the rat. Brain Res. 1987, 400, 40–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Jones, S.L.; Gebhart, G.F. Quantitative characterization of ceruleospinal inhibition of nociceptive transmission in the rat. J. Neurophysiol. 1986, 56, 1397–1410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Jones, S.L.; Gebhart, G.F. Characterization of coeruleospinal inhibition of the nociceptive tail-flick reflex in the rat: Mediation by spinal alpha 2-adrenoceptors. Brain Res. 1986, 364, 315–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Suárez-Pereira, I.; Llorca-Torralba, M.; Bravo, L.; Camarena-Delgado, C.; Soriano-Mas, C.; Berrocoso, E. The Role of the Locus Coeruleus in Pain and Associated Stress-Related Disorders. Biol. Psychiatry 2022, 91, 786–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Li, J.; Wei, Y.; Zhou, J.; Zou, H.; Ma, L.; Liu, C.; Xiao, Z.; Liu, X.; Tan, X.; Yu, T.; et al. Activation of locus coeruleus-spinal cord noradrenergic neurons alleviates neuropathic pain in mice via reducing neuroinflammation from astrocytes and microglia in spinal dorsal horn. J. Neuroinflamm. 2022, 19, 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Hasan, M.; Lei, Z.; Akter, M.; Iqbal, Z.; Usaila, F.; Ramkrishnan, A.S.; Li, Y. Chemogenetic activation of astrocytes promotes remyelination and restores cognitive deficits in visceral hypersensitive rats. iScience 2023, 26, 105840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Lechner, S.M.; Curtis, A.L.; Brons, R.; Valentino, R.J. Locus coeruleus activation by colon distention: Role of corticotropin-releasing factor and excitatory amino acids. Brain Res. 1997, 756, 114–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Rouzade-Dominguez, M.L.; Curtis, A.L.; Valentino, R.J. Role of Barrington’s nucleus in the activation of rat locus coeruleus neurons by colonic distension. Brain Res. 2001, 917, 206–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Marson, L. Identification of central nervous system neurons that innervate the bladder body, bladder base, or external urethral sphincter of female rats: A transneuronal tracing study using pseudorabies virus. J. Comp. Neurol. 1997, 389, 584–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Sly, J.D.; Colvill, L.; McKinley, J.M.; Oldfield, J.B. Identification of neural projections from the forebrain to the kidney, using the virus pseudorabies. J. Auton. Nerv. Syst. 1999, 77, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Vizzard, M.A.; Erickson, V.L.; Card, J.P.; Roppolo, J.R.; de Groat, W.C. Transneuronal labeling of neurons in the adult rat brainstem and spinal cord after injection of pseudorabies virus into the urethra. J. Comp. Neurol. 1995, 355, 629–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Page, M.E.; Akaoka, H.; Aston-Jones, G.; Valentino, R.J. Bladder distention activates noradrenergic locus coeruleus neurons by an excitatory amino acid mechanism. Neuroscience 1992, 51, 555–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Rickenbacher, E.; Baez, M.A.; Hale, L.; Leiser, S.C.; Zderic, S.A.; Valentino, R.J. Impact of overactive bladder on the brain: Central sequelae of a visceral pathology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 10589–10594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Monnikes, H.; Schmidt, B.G.; Tebbe, J.; Bauer, C.; Tache, Y. Microinfusion of corticotropin releasing factor into the locus coeruleus/subcoeruleus nuclei stimulates colonic motor function in rats. Brain Res. 1994, 644, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Monnikes, H.; Tebbe, J.; Bauer, C.; Lauer, G.; Arnold, R. Microinfusion of corticotropin-releasing factor into the locus coeruleus/subcoeruleus nuclei inhibits gastric acid secretion via spinal pathways in the rat. Brain Res. 1996, 728, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Ouyang, X.; Li, S.; Zhou, J.; Chen, J.D. Electroacupuncture Ameliorates Gastric Hypersensitivity via Adrenergic Pathway in a Rat Model of Functional Dyspepsia. Neuromodulation 2020, 23, 1137–1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Zhang, S.; Li, S.; Liu, Y.; Ye, F.; Yin, J.; Foreman, R.D.; Wang, D.; Chen, J.D.Z. Electroacupuncture via chronically implanted electrodes improves gastric dysmotility mediated by autonomic-cholinergic mechanisms in a rodent model of functional dyspepsia. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2018, 30, e13381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Huang, Z.; Lin, Z.; Lin, C.; Chu, H.; Zheng, X.; Chen, B.; Du, L.; Chen, J.D.Z.; Dai, N. Transcutaneous Electrical Acustimulation Improves Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation by Accelerating Colon Transit and Reducing Rectal Sensation Using Autonomic Mechanisms. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 2022, 117, 1491–1501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Egorova, N.; Gollub, R.L.; Kong, J. Repeated verum but not placebo acupuncture normalizes connectivity in brain regions dysregulated in chronic pain. Neuroimage Clin. 2015, 9, 430–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Qin, W.; Tian, J.; Bai, L.; Pan, X.; Yang, L.; Chen, P.; Dai, J.; Ai, L.; Zhao, B.; Gong, Q.; et al. FMRI connectivity analysis of acupuncture effects on an amygdala-associated brain network. Mol. Pain 2008, 4, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Yu, S.; Ortiz, A.; Gollub, R.L.; Wilson, G.; Gerber, J.; Park, J.; Huang, Y.; Shen, W.; Chan, S.-T.; Wasan, A.D.; et al. Acupuncture Treatment Modulates the Connectivity of Key Regions of the Descending Pain Modulation and Reward Systems in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain. J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9, 1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Millan, M.J. Descending control of pain. Prog. Neurobiol. 2002, 66, 355–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Yen, C.T.; Lu, P.L. Thalamus and pain. Acta Anaesthesiol. Taiwan 2013, 51, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Cao, Z.; Wu, X.; Chen, S.; Fan, J.; Zhang, R.; Owyang, C.; Li, Y. Anterior cingulate cortex modulates visceral pain as measured by visceromotor responses in viscerally hypersensitive rats. Gastroenterology 2008, 134, 535–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Apkarian, A.V.; Bushnell, M.C.; Treede, R.D.; Zubieta, J.K. Human brain mechanisms of pain perception and regulation in health and disease. Eur. J. Pain 2005, 9, 463–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Dick, B.D.; Rashiq, S. Disruption of attention and working memory traces in individuals with chronic pain. Anesth. Analg. 2007, 104, 1223–1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Ofen, N.; Kao, Y.C.; Sokol-Hessner, P.; Kim, H.; Whitfield-Gabrieli, S.; Gabrieli, J.D. Development of the declarative memory system in the human brain. Nat. Neurosci. 2007, 10, 1198–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Scoville, W.B.; Milner, B. Loss of Recent Memory after Bilateral Hippocampal Lesions. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry 1957, 20, 11–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Buzsaki, G.; Moser, E.I. Memory, navigation and theta rhythm in the hippocampal-entorhinal system. Nat. Neurosci. 2013, 16, 130–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Conway, M.A. Episodic memories. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47, 2305–2313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Bannerman, D.M.; Matthews, P.; Deacon, R.M.; Rawlins, J.N. Medial septal lesions mimic effects of both selective dorsal and ventral hippocampal lesions. Behav. Neurosci. 2004, 118, 1033–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Mac, L.P. Psychosomatic disease and the visceral brain; recent developments bearing on the Papez theory of emotion. Psychosom. Med. 1949, 11, 338–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Keefe, J.O.; Nadel, L. The Hippocampus as a Cognitive Map; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  169. O’Keefe, J.; Dostrovsky, J. The hippocampus as a spatial map. Preliminary evidence from unit activity in the freely-moving rat. Brain Res. 1971, 34, 171–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Cholvin, T.; Hok, V.; Giorgi, L.; Chaillan, F.A.; Poucet, B. Ventral Midline Thalamus Is Necessary for Hippocampal Place Field Stability and Cell Firing Modulation. J. Neurosci. 2018, 38, 158–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Delli Pizzi, S.; Chiacchiaretta, P.; Mantini, D.; Bubbico, G.; Ferretti, A.; Edden, R.A.; Di Giulio, C.; Onofrj, M.; Bonanni, L. Functional and neurochemical interactions within the amygdala–medial prefrontal cortex circuit and their relevance to emotional processing. Brain Struct. Funct. 2017, 222, 1267–1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  172. Floresco, S.B.; Seamans, J.K.; Phillips, A.G. Selective roles for hippocampal, prefrontal cortical, and ventral striatal circuits in radial-arm maze tasks with or without a delay. J. Neurosci. 1997, 17, 1880–1890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Fujisawa, S.; Buzsaki, G. A 4 Hz oscillation adaptively synchronizes prefrontal, VTA, and hippocampal activities. Neuron 2011, 72, 153–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Huff, N.C.; Rudy, J.W. The amygdala modulates hippocampus-dependent context memory formation and stores cue-shock associations. Behav. Neurosci. 2004, 118, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  175. Ito, H.T.; Zhang, S.J.; Witter, M.P.; Moser, E.I.; Moser, M.B. A prefrontal-thalamo-hippocampal circuit for goal-directed spatial navigation. Nature 2015, 522, 50–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Jay, T.M.; Glowinski, J.; Thierry, A.M. Selectivity of the hippocampal projection to the prelimbic area of the prefrontal cortex in the rat. Brain Res. 1989, 505, 337–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Rajasethupathy, P.; Sankaran, S.; Marshel, J.H.; Kim, C.K.; Ferenczi, E.; Lee, S.Y.; Berndt, A.; Ramakrishnan, C.; Jaffe, A.; Lo, M.; et al. Projections from neocortex mediate top-down control of memory retrieval. Nature 2015, 526, 653–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Wirt, R.A.; Hyman, J.M. ACC Theta Improves Hippocampal Contextual Processing during Remote Recall. Cell Rep. 2019, 27, 2313–2327.e2314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Richter-Levin, G.; Akirav, I. Amygdala-hippocampus dynamic interaction in relation to memory. Mol. Neurobiol. 2000, 22, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Yang, Y.; Wang, J.Z. From Structure to Behavior in Basolateral Amygdala-Hippocampus Circuits. Front. Neural Circuits 2017, 11, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Irle, E.; Markowitsch, H.J. Connections of the hippocampal formation, mamillary bodies, anterior thalamus and cingulate cortex. A retrograde study using horseradish peroxidase in the cat. Exp. Brain Res. 1982, 47, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Melzack, R.; Casey, K.L. Sensory, motivational, and central control determinants of pain: A new conceptual model. Ski. Senses 1968, 1, 423–443. [Google Scholar]
  183. Khanna, S.; Sinclair, J.G. Noxious stimuli produce prolonged changes in the CA1 region of the rat hippocampus. Pain 1989, 39, 337–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Ren, W.J.; Liu, Y.; Zhou, L.J.; Li, W.; Zhong, Y.; Pang, R.P.; Xin, W.J.; Wei, X.H.; Wang, J.; Zhu, H.Q.; et al. Peripheral nerve injury leads to working memory deficits and dysfunction of the hippocampus by upregulation of TNF-alpha in rodents. Neuropsychopharmacology 2011, 36, 979–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  185. Kodama, D.; Ono, H.; Tanabe, M. Increased hippocampal glycine uptake and cognitive dysfunction after peripheral nerve injury. Pain 2011, 152, 809–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  186. Mokhtari, T.; Tu, Y.; Hu, L. Involvement of the hippocampus in chronic pain and depression. Brain Sci. Adv. 2020, 5, 288–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Thompson, J.M.; Neugebauer, V. Cortico-limbic pain mechanisms. Neurosci. Lett. 2019, 702, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Larsson, M.B.; Tillisch, K.; Craig, A.D.; Engstrom, M.; Labus, J.; Naliboff, B.; Lundberg, P.; Strom, M.; Mayer, E.A.; Walter, S.A. Brain responses to visceral stimuli reflect visceral sensitivity thresholds in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology 2012, 142, 463–472.e463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Xu, Y.; Cui, S.Y.; Ma, Q.; Shi, J.; Yu, Y.; Li, J.X.; Zheng, L.; Zhang, Y.; Si, J.M.; Yu, Y.C. trans-Resveratrol Ameliorates Stress-Induced Irritable Bowel Syndrome-Like Behaviors by Regulation of Brain–gut Axis. Front. Pharmacol. 2018, 9, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Jun, J.J.; Steinmetz, N.A.; Siegle, J.H.; Denman, D.J.; Bauza, M.; Barbarits, B.; Lee, A.K.; Anastassiou, C.A.; Andrei, A.; Aydin, C.; et al. Fully integrated silicon probes for high-density recording of neural activity. Nature 2017, 551, 232–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Chung, J.E.; Joo, H.R.; Fan, J.L.; Liu, D.F.; Barnett, A.H.; Chen, S.; Geaghan-Breiner, C.; Karlsson, M.P.; Karlsson, M.; Lee, K.Y.; et al. High-Density, Long-Lasting, and Multi-region Electrophysiological Recordings Using Polymer Electrode Arrays. Neuron 2019, 101, 21–31.e25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Buzsaki, G. Large-scale recording of neuronal ensembles. Nat. Neurosci. 2004, 7, 446–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Sloin, H.E.; Levi, A.; Someck, S.; Spivak, L.; Stark, E. High Fidelity Theta Phase Rolling of CA1 Neurons. J. Neurosci. 2022, 42, 3184–3196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Steinmetz, N.A.; Koch, C.; Harris, K.D.; Carandini, M. Challenges and opportunities for large-scale electrophysiology with Neuropixels probes. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2018, 50, 92–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, n71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Gao, J.; Wu, X.; Owyang, C.; Li, Y. Enhanced responses of the anterior cingulate cortex neurones to colonic distension in viscerally hypersensitive rats. J. Physiol. 2006, 570, 169–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Cao, B.; Wang, J.; Mu, L.; Poon, D.C.; Li, Y. Impairment of decision making associated with disruption of phase-locking in the anterior cingulate cortex in viscerally hypersensitive rats. Exp. Neurol. 2016, 286, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Ji, G.; Li, Z.; Neugebauer, V. Reactive oxygen species mediate visceral pain-related amygdala plasticity and behaviors. Pain 2015, 156, 825–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Diba, K.; Buzsaki, G. Forward and reverse hippocampal place-cell sequences during ripples. Nat. Neurosci. 2007, 10, 1241–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Vandecasteele, M.; M, S.; Royer, S.; Belluscio, M.; Berenyi, A.; Diba, K.; Fujisawa, S.; Grosmark, A.; Mao, D.; Mizuseki, K.; et al. Large-scale recording of neurons by movable silicon probes in behaving rodents. J. Vis. Exp. 2012, e3568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Hebb, D.O. The Organization of Behavior; Wiley and Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1949. [Google Scholar]
  202. Siegel, M.; Donner, T.H.; Engel, A.K. Spectral fingerprints of large-scale neuronal interactions. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2012, 13, 121–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Aladjalova, N.A. Infra-slow rhythmic oscillations of the steady potential of the cerebral cortex. Nature 1957, 179, 957–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Chrobok, L.; Belle, M.D.C.; Myung, J. From Fast Oscillations to Circadian Rhythms: Coupling at Multiscale Frequency Bands in the Rodent Subcortical Visual System. Front. Physiol. 2021, 12, 738229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  205. Csicsvari, J.; Hirase, H.; Czurko, A.; Mamiya, A.; Buzsaki, G. Oscillatory coupling of hippocampal pyramidal cells and interneurons in the behaving Rat. J. Neurosci. 1999, 19, 274–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Gourevitch, B.; Martin, C.; Postal, O.; Eggermont, J.J. Oscillations in the auditory system and their possible role. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2020, 113, 507–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  207. Ward, L.M. Synchronous neural oscillations and cognitive processes. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2003, 7, 553–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Miltner, W.H.; Braun, C.; Arnold, M.; Witte, H.; Taub, E. Coherence of gamma-band EEG activity as a basis for associative learning. Nature 1999, 397, 434–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Legrain, V.; Iannetti, G.D.; Plaghki, L.; Mouraux, A. The pain matrix reloaded: A salience detection system for the body. Prog. Neurobiol. 2011, 93, 111–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Peng, W.; Tang, D. Pain Related Cortical Oscillations: Methodological Advances and Potential Applications. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 2016, 10, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Cohen, M.X. Analyzing Neural Time Series Data: Theory and Practice; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  212. Cotic, M.; Chiu, A.W.; Jahromi, S.S.; Carlen, P.L.; Bardakjian, B.L. Common time-frequency analysis of local field potential and pyramidal cell activity in seizure-like events of the rat hippocampus. J. Neural Eng. 2011, 8, 046024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Allen, J. Short term spectral analysis, synthesis, and modification by discrete Fourier transform. IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal. Process. 1977, 25, 235–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Roach, B.J.; Mathalon, D.H. Event-related EEG time-frequency analysis: An overview of measures and an analysis of early gamma band phase locking in schizophrenia. Schizophr. Bull. 2008, 34, 907–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  215. Livanov, M.N. Spatial Organization of Cerebral Processes; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  216. Vinogradova, O.S. Hippocampus as comparator: Role of the two input and two output systems of the hippocampus in selection and registration of information. Hippocampus 2001, 11, 578–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Takehara-Nishiuchi, K.; McNaughton, B.L. Spontaneous changes of neocortical code for associative memory during consolidation. Science 2008, 322, 960–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Buzsaki, G. Theta oscillations in the hippocampus. Neuron 2002, 33, 325–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Hasselmo, M.E. What is the function of hippocampal theta rhythm?--Linking behavioral data to phasic properties of field potential and unit recording data. Hippocampus 2005, 15, 936–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Ploner, M.; Sorg, C.; Gross, J. Brain Rhythms of Pain. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2017, 21, 100–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Sarnthein, J.; Stern, J.; Aufenberg, C.; Rousson, V.; Jeanmonod, D. Increased EEG power and slowed dominant frequency in patients with neurogenic pain. Brain 2006, 129, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Wang, J.; Cao, B.; Yu, T.R.; Jelfs, B.; Yan, J.; Chan, R.H.; Li, Y. Theta-frequency phase-locking of single anterior cingulate cortex neurons and synchronization with the medial thalamus are modulated by visceral noxious stimulation in rats. Neuroscience 2015, 298, 200–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Drewes, A.M.; Krarup, A.L.; Detlefsen, S.; Malmstrom, M.L.; Dimcevski, G.; Funch-Jensen, P. Pain in chronic pancreatitis: The role of neuropathic pain mechanisms. Gut 2008, 57, 1616–1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Sarnthein, J.; Jeanmonod, D. High thalamocortical theta coherence in patients with neurogenic pain. Neuroimage 2008, 39, 1910–1917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Ascending pain modulation. The ACC and IC receive nociceptive signals from the SDH through the thalamus. ACC: Anterior cingulate cortex, IC: Insular cortex.
Figure 1. Ascending pain modulation. The ACC and IC receive nociceptive signals from the SDH through the thalamus. ACC: Anterior cingulate cortex, IC: Insular cortex.
Diagnostics 13 00627 g001
Figure 2. Descending pain modulation. The pain signals from the cortical brain regions (ACC, mPFC) reach the PAG and LC. PAG and LC exert their pain modulatory effects via their descending projection to the RVM and spinal cord, respectively. ACC: Anterior cingulate cortex, PFC: Prefrontal cortex, PAG: Periaqueductal gray, LC: Locus coeruleus, RVM: Rostral ventrolateral medulla.
Figure 2. Descending pain modulation. The pain signals from the cortical brain regions (ACC, mPFC) reach the PAG and LC. PAG and LC exert their pain modulatory effects via their descending projection to the RVM and spinal cord, respectively. ACC: Anterior cingulate cortex, PFC: Prefrontal cortex, PAG: Periaqueductal gray, LC: Locus coeruleus, RVM: Rostral ventrolateral medulla.
Diagnostics 13 00627 g002
Figure 3. Flowchart of the chronic extracellular recordings in model animals.
Figure 3. Flowchart of the chronic extracellular recordings in model animals.
Diagnostics 13 00627 g003
Figure 4. PRISMA flow diagram. Note: Following the screening and reviewing process guidelines based on Page et al. [195].
Figure 4. PRISMA flow diagram. Note: Following the screening and reviewing process guidelines based on Page et al. [195].
Diagnostics 13 00627 g004
Table 1. Comparisons of models to assess mechanisms of VH in animal models.
Table 1. Comparisons of models to assess mechanisms of VH in animal models.
Animal ModelSpecies, Sex, and InterventionFindingsReferences
VHRat, Male, WASThese animals had higher corticosterone and increased mass of the adrenal gland.Myers et al., 2012 [33]
VHRat, Male, WASCB1 receptor expression decreased, and TRPV1 receptor expression increased. DNA methylation and histone acetylation of genes responsible for visceral pain sensation also increased.Hong et al., 2011 [41]
Hong et al., 2015 [42]
VHRat, Male, AAElevated NE concentration in blood plasma, no change in the β2AR expressionZhu et al., 2015 [43]
VHRat, Male, AA, NMD, AMSUpregulation of the P2Y1 and P2X3 receptors was observed in the colonic DRG, the expression of PKC protein in the spinal cord, and the enhancement of ATP-induced current density.Zhao et al., 2020 [44]
Xu et al. [45]
Hu et al., 2020 [46]
ColitisRat, Male, TNBSThis study reported increased colon weight, IL-6, and IL-10 production, higher fibrosis score, and increased anxiety-related behavior. No difference was observed in intestinal permeability, colonic TNF-α, MPO activity, and TRPV1 expression.Salameh et al., 2019 [47]
VHRat, Male, NCI, MORecording from viscero-sensitive SDH neurons showed higher activity. Interestingly this study reported no identifiable pathological changes in the colon.Al-Chaer et al., 2000 [20]
VHRat, Male, CRFCRF injection significantly increased NE and dopamine release in the CeA while not affecting the serotonin level.Su et al., 2015 [27]
ColitisRat, Male, TNBSShorter colon length, increased spleen weight, decreased IL-10, but increased IL-6, IL-17A, MPO, and TNF-α production.Gou et al., 2019 [24]
ColitisMouse, Male, DSSThese mice had diarrhea, rectal bleeding, weight loss, erosions, and inflammatory changes, including crypt abscesses in the large intestine, prominent regenerations of the colonic mucosa, shortening of the large intestine, formation of lymphoid follicles, increased intestinal microflora, Bacteroides distasonis, and Clostridium spp.Okayasu et al., 1990 [23]
VHMouse, Male, NMDHigher neuronal discharge in the CL and ACC in response to CRD; increased NMDA receptors and overactive CaMKIIα in the ACC. Optogenetic inhibition or activation of CL either suppressed or enhanced the ACC neural activity and pain sensitivity, respectively.Xu et al., 2022 [48]
Abbreviations: Acetic acid (AA), Adenosine triphosphate (ATP), Adult multiple stress (AMS), Anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), Calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase type II subunit alpha (CAMKIIα), Cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1), Claustrum (CL), Central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA), Colorectal distension (CRD), Corticotrophin releasing factor (CRF), Dextran sodium sulfate (DSS), Dorsal root ganglion (DRG), Interleukin (IL), Mustard oil (MO), Myeloperoxidase (MPO), Neonatal colonic irritation (NCI), Neonatal maternal separation (NMD), Noradrenaline (NE), N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA), Protein kinase C (PKC), Purinergic receptor (P2Y1 and P2X3), The β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR), Tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), Transient receptor potential vanilloid subfamily, member 1 (TRPV1), Visceral hypersensitivity (VH), Water avoidance stress (WAS), and 2,4,6-Trinitrobenzene sulfonic acid (TNBS).
Table 2. Summary of the reviewed literature.
Table 2. Summary of the reviewed literature.
ArticleModelSpecies and Animal NumberRecording Site and TechniquesMain Findings
Lyubashina et al., 2022 [127]ColitisRat
Control (n = 26)
Colitis (n = 26)
PAG
Tungsten microelectrode
PAG neuronal recording revealed a colitis-elicited decrease in the proportion of CRD-excited neurons and an increase in unresponsive cells, suggesting the role of PAG in ascending and descending visceral nociception control.
Gao et al., 2006 [196]VHRat
Control (n = 15)
VH (n = 22)
ACC
Glass microelectrode
ACC neurons had an increased firing rate compared to control rats in response to CRD, suggesting the sensitization of the ACC in VH rats.
Cao et al., 2016 [197]VHRat
Control (n = 6)
VH (n = 6)
BLA, ACC
Multi-channels electrode
ACC neurons in VH rats had disrupted spikes phase-locking to theta oscillations. Moreover, they found desynchronized theta activities between BLA and ACC.
Xu et al., 2022 [140]VHMice
Control (n = 8)
NMD (n = 28)
Claustrum, ACC
Multi-channel electrode
Discharge of action potentials increased in ACC and Claustrum in response to CRD.
Hasan et al., 2023 [141]VHRat
(n = 10)
BLA, ACC
Multi-channels electrode
VH caused hypomyelination in the ACC neurons, decision-making deficits, and impaired ACC-BLA synchrony in the theta band. Chemogenetic activation of astrocytes recovered VH-induced desynchronization.
Ji et al., 2015 [198]ColitisRat
(n = 12)
CeA
Glass insulated carbon filament electrodes
CeA neurons showed increased firing in response to graded CRD, suggesting the presence of vis-cero-nociceptive neurons in the CeA.
O’Keefe et al., 1971 [169]Wild typeRat
(n = 23)
Hippocampus
Silicone probe
This is the first study demonstrating place-cell in the hippocampus, suggesting that the hippocampus provides a reference map to the rest of the brain.
Diba et al., 2007 [199]Wild typeRat
(n = 3)
Hippocampus
Silicone probe
This study demonstrated that hippocampal place-cell sequences are fired in forward and reverse order and replayed similarly during subsequent sleep.
Vandecasteele et al., 2012 [200]Wild typeRatHippocampus
Silicone probe
This methodological study provides detailed steps for recording multiple single neurons and LFPs by movable silicone probes in behaving animals.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alam, M.J.; Chen, J.D.Z. Electrophysiology as a Tool to Decipher the Network Mechanism of Visceral Pain in Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders. Diagnostics 2023, 13, 627. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13040627

AMA Style

Alam MJ, Chen JDZ. Electrophysiology as a Tool to Decipher the Network Mechanism of Visceral Pain in Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders. Diagnostics. 2023; 13(4):627. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13040627

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alam, Md Jahangir, and Jiande D. Z. Chen. 2023. "Electrophysiology as a Tool to Decipher the Network Mechanism of Visceral Pain in Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders" Diagnostics 13, no. 4: 627. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13040627

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop