Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 274

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Electrical stimulation of precentral cortical area in the treatment of central pain: electrophysiological and PET study

Peyron, R., Garcia-Larrea, L., Deiber, M. P., Cinotti, L., Convers, P., Sindou, M., Mauguière, F., Laurent, B.·1995·Pain

Abstract

The clinical, electrophysiological and haemodynamic effects of precentral gyrus stimulation (PGS) as a treatment of refractory post-stroke pain were studied in 2 patients. The first patient had a right hemibody pain secondary to a left parietal infarct sparing the thalamus, while the second patient had left lower limb pain developed after a right mesencephalic infarct. In both cases, spontaneous pain was associated with hyperpathia, allodynia and hypoaesthesia in the painful territory involving both lemniscal and extra-lemniscal sensory modalities in patient 1, extra-lemniscal sensory modality only in patient 2. Both patients were treated with electrical PGS by means of a 4-pole electrode, the central sulcus being per-operatively located using the phase-reversal of the N20 wave of somatosensory evoked potentials. No sensory side effect, abnormal movement or epileptic seizure were observed during PGS. The analgesic effects were somatotopically distributed according to the localization of electrode on motor cortex. A satisfactory long-lasting pain control (60-70% on visual analog scale) as well as attenuation of nociceptive reflexes were obtained during PGS in the first patient. Pain relief was less marked and only transient (2 months) in patient 2, in spite of a similar operative procedure. In this patient, in whom PGS eventually evoked painful dysethesiae, no attenuation of nociceptive RIII reflex could be evidenced during PGS. Cerebral blood flow (CBF) was studied using emission tomography (PET) with O-labeled water. The sites of CBF increase during PGS were the same in both patients, namely the thalamus ipsilateral to PGS, cingulate gyrus, orbito-frontal cortex and brainstem. CBF increase in brainstem structures was greater and lasted longer in patient 1 while patient 2 showed a greater CBF increase in orbito-frontal and cingular regions. Our results suggest that PGS-induced analgesia is somatotopically mediated and does not require the integrity of somatosensory cortex and lemniscal system. PGS analgesic efficacy may be mainly related to increased synaptic activity in the thalamus and brainstem while changes in cingulate gyrus and orbito-frontal cortex may be rather related to attentional and/or emotional processes. The inhibitory control on pain would involve thalamic and/or brainstem relays on descending pathways down to the spinal cord segments, leading to a depression of nociceptive reflexes. Painful dysesthesiae during stimulation have to be distinguished from other innocuous sensory side effects, since they may compromise PGS efficacy.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0304-3959(94)00211-v

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Cited by

See all 274

Metadata

Authors
Peyron, R., Garcia-Larrea, L., Deiber, M. P., Cinotti, L., Convers, P., Sindou, M., Mauguière, F., & Laurent, B.
Venue
Pain
Published
1995-09
Volume
62
Issue
3
Pages
275-286
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1968369248
Cited by
274
References
36
FWCI
5.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Electrical stimulation of precentral cortical area in the treatment of central pain: electrophysiological and PET study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/0304-3959(94)00211-v
The paper
Peyron, R., Garcia-Larrea, L., Deiber, M. P., Cinotti, L., Convers, P., Sindou, M., Mauguière, F., & Laurent, B. (1995). Electrical stimulation of precentral cortical area in the treatment of central pain: electrophysiological and PET study. Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(94)00211-v

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.