Cited by 432Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPediatric Pain Management TechniquesNeonatal and fetal brain pathology

Long-Term Behavioral Effects of Repetitive Pain in Neonatal Rat Pups

Open access
Anand, K.J.S, Coskun, V, Thrivikraman, K.V, Nemeroff, C.B, Plotsky, P.M·1999·Physiology & Behavior

Abstract

Human preterm neonates are subjected to repetitive pain during neonatal intensive care. We hypothesized that exposure to repetitive neonatal pain may cause permanent or long-term changes because of the developmental plasticity of the immature brain. Neonatal rat pups were stimulated one, two, or four times each day from P0 to P7 with either needle prick (noxious groups N1, N2, N4) or cotton tip rub (tactile groups T1, T2, T4). In groups N2, N4, T2, T4 stimuli were applied to separate paws at hourly intervals;each paw was stimulated only once a day. Identical rearing occurred from P7 to P22 days. Pain thresholds were measured on P16, P22, and P65 (hot-plate test), and testing for defensive withdrawal, alcohol preference, air-puff startle, and social discrimination tests occurred during adulthood. Adult rats were exposed to a hot plate at 62 degrees C for 20 s, then sacrificed and perfused at 0 and 30 min after exposure. Fos expression in the somatosensory cortex was measured by immunocytochemistry. Weight gain in the N2 group was greater than the T2 group on P16 (p < 0.05) and P22 (p < 0.005); no differences occurred in the other groups. Decreased pain latencies were noted in the N4 group [5.0 +/- 1.0 s vs. 6.2 +/- 1.4 s on P16 (p < 0.05); 3.9 +/- 0.5 s vs. 5.5 +/- 1.6 s on P22 (p < 0.005)], indicating effects of repetitive neonatal pain on subsequent development of the pain system. As adults, N4 group rats showed an increased preference for alcohol (55 +/- 18% vs. 32 +/- 21%; p = 0.004); increased latency in exploratory and defensive withdrawal behavior (p < 0.05); and a prolonged chemosensory memory in the social discrimination test (p < 0.05). No significant differences occurred in corticosterone and ACTH levels following air-puff startle or in pain thresholds at P65 between N4 and T4 groups. Fos expression at 30 min after hot-plate exposure was significantly greater in all areas of the somatosensory cortex in the T4 group compared with the N4 group (p < 0.05), whereas no differences occurred just after exposure. These data suggest that repetitive pain in neonatal rat pups may lead to an altered development of the pain system associated with decreased pain thresholds during development. Increased plasticity of the neonatal brain may allow these and other changes in brain development to increase their vulnerability to stress disorders and anxiety-mediated adult behavior. Similar behavioral changes have been observed during the later childhood of expreterm neonates who were exposed to prolonged periods of neonatal intensive care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0031-9384(98)00338-2

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anand, K. J. S., Coskun, V, Thrivikraman, K. V., Nemeroff, C. B., & Plotsky, P. M.
Affiliations
  • Arkansas Children's Hospital (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Corresponding author
Anand, K.J.S
Venue
Physiology & Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-06
Volume
66
Issue
4
Pages
627-637
ISSN
0031-9384 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1975653440
Cited by
432
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 16
FWCI
6.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physiology & Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH042088, MH42088)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD036484, HD01123-01A1, Z01HD001123)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Pediatric Pain Management Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Neonatal and fetal brain pathology
Keywords
neonatal pain, developmental plasticity, pain threshold, alcohol preference, social discrimination, somatosensory cortex, Fos expression, corticosterone, ACTH, neonatal intensive care, preterm infants, pain memory, tactile stimulation, weight gain, startle response, hot plate
MeSH terms
Adrenocorticotropic Hormone, Aging, Alcohol Drinking, Animals, Animals, Newborn, Arousal, Corticosterone, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Intensive Care Units, Neonatal, Neuronal Plasticity, Pain, Psychophysiology, Mental Recall, Social Behavior, Somatosensory Cortex, Reflex, Startle, Thermosensing, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-fos, Pain Threshold, Rats

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