The parabrachial nucleus (PBN) relays interoceptive and exteroceptive information to limbic brain regions. In particular, lateral PBN projections to the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) are thought to encode the affective dimension of pain. Pain in the orofacial region is thought to be more unpleasant than pain elsewhere in the body because the face plays an important role in social interactions, feeding, and exploration. The trigeminal nerve (CN V) carries sensory, including nociceptive, information from the orofacial region to the central nervous system. Canonically, the affective dimension of orofacial pain is thought to be encoded by the medial trigeminothalamic tract, which projects to midline thalamic nuclei and further to limbic brain regions. A preclinical study identified an additional circuit that carries orofacial nociceptive information to subcortical limbic brain regions via the lateral PBN. This circuit, from the CN V to the lateral PBN and further to the CeA, is thought to contribute to the heightened negative affect of orofacial pain. However, the CN V–lateral PBN–CeA circuit has yet to be delineated in humans. Here, we aimed to resolve this circuit in humans with diffusion MRI from the Human Connectome Project (HCP) using probabilistic tractography. We first delineated the tract at 7T (n = 150) to determine whether this tract can be resolved. Next, we delineated the tract at the more readily available, but lower resolution 3T field strength (n = 155). Given the growing evidence of sex differences in pain mechanisms, as a secondary aim, we explored whether sex differences in connectivity strengths of the circuit existed in our sample. The basolateral amygdala (BLAT) was used as a negative control, as we did not anticipate CN V-lPBN-BLAT connectivity. The CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit had significantly stronger connectivity strength than the BLAT circuit at both field strengths (both p < 0.001). Only the right CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit at 3T showed significantly stronger connectivity in males than in females (p = 0.002). This study delineated the human CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit for the first time in vivo. This circuit may provide a neuroanatomical substrate for the heightened negative affect elicited by orofacial pain and could serve as a potential therapeutic target.

The parabrachial nucleus (PBN) receives interoceptive and exteroceptive information and projects to limbic brain regions (Al-Khater & Todd, 2009; Bernard et al., 1994; Grigson et al., 1998; Li & Sheets, 2020; Raver et al., 2020; Wilson et al., 2019). Specifically, it relays nociceptive (Sun et al., 2020), pruritic (Mu et al., 2017), and gustatory (Fu et al., 2019) signals, and contributes to the development and maintenance of neuropathic pain (Uddin et al., 2018), aversive learning (Han et al., 2015), and feeding behaviours (Alhadeff et al., 2018), among others. Projections from the lateral parabrachial nucleus (lateral PBN) to the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) carry nociceptive information from the body and contribute to the affective dimension of pain.

Orofacial pain is thought to have a greater affective component (Auvray et al., 2010) and is more unpleasant than pain elsewhere on the body (Schmidt et al., 2015, 2016; Zakrzewska et al., 2017). This is because the orofacial region has special biological, emotional, and psychological significance given its crucial roles in social, feeding, and exploratory behaviours (Sessle, 2000). However, the neural underpinnings of the heightened affective response to orofacial pain in humans remain unknown.

Nociceptive information from the orofacial region is carried by the trigeminal nerve (the 5th cranial nerve; CN V) to the thalamus via the trigeminothalamic tract (Sessle, 2019). Specifically, the dorsal trigeminothalamic tract carries nociceptive information from the orofacial region to limbic brain regions via midline thalamic nuclei (Terrier et al., 2022).

A preclinical study identified an additional monosynaptic circuit that carries orofacial nociceptive information to limbic brain regions (Rodriguez et al., 2017). This circuit, from the CN V to the lateral PBN (lPBN) and further to the CeA, contributes to the heightened negative affect elicited by orofacial pain in mice (Rodriguez et al., 2017).

It is thus feasible that the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit contributes to the heightened orofacial pain affect in humans. However, the presence of this circuit in humans has yet to be established. To investigate this circuit in acute and chronic pain, it is essential to first determine whether it can be resolved using neuroimaging in humans.

Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) and tractography have been successfully used to non-invasively delineate complex white matter pathways in humans. Briefly, dMRI relies on anisotropic diffusion of water in neural tissues to infer the dominant orientations of white matter in each voxel. Tractography relies on these orientations to reconstruct white matter pathways connecting brain regions (Behrens et al., 2007; Dyrby et al., 2007; Parker, 2004). DMRI has been used to delineate previously undefined brain tracts—that is, hodology (Catani, 2007), at both 3T and 7T (Cormie et al., 2023; Kaya et al., 2023; Shim & Baek, 2022).

There is emerging evidence of sexually dimorphic neural mechanisms of nociception, pain-related brain circuits, and pain modulatory pathways (Cantu et al., 2022; Mogil et al., 2024; Osborne & Davis, 2022; Presto et al., 2022; Stratton et al., 2024). Furthermore, the prevalence of acute and chronic orofacial pain is greater in females than in males (Haggman-Henrikson et al., 2020; Sessle, 2021; Shinal & Fillingim, 2007). Therefore, should the presence of this circuit be established in humans, further investigation of sex differences is warranted.

The overall goal of this study was to determine whether the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit can be resolved in humans using dMRI data. Given the small size of structures in the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit, we first sought to delineate this circuit with ultra-high field (UHF; 7T) imaging. 7T imaging provides a higher signal-to-noise ratio, spatial resolution, and contrast-to-noise ratio than the more conventional and readily accessible 3T imaging (Sclocco et al., 2018), thus allowing for better visualization of smaller structures, such as those found in the brainstem. However, as 3T imaging is more established, we further sought to determine whether the circuit could be delineated at this lower field strength, as this would allow for future investigations in clinical populations, as well as investigations in extant data of orofacial pain. This approach has previously been used to delineate neural circuits at both 7T and 3T (Cormie et al., 2023; Kaya et al., 2023; Shim & Baek, 2022).

Here, we aimed to delineate the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit in vivo using MRI data from the Human Connectome Project (HCP). As a secondary aim, we determined whether there are sex differences in CN V–lPBN–CeA connectivity strength at both 7T and 3T. We hypothesize that we will resolve the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit at both 7T and 3T and that the circuit will have stronger structural connectivity in females than in males.

All procedures were approved by the University of Toronto’s Human Research Ethics Board (Protocol Number: 40458). The data used in this study are openly available in the HCP database at https://db.humanconnectome.org, HCP S1200 Release (February 2017), which comprises MRI scans from 1,200 participants. A subset of 173 participants also underwent 7T scanning.

2.1 Participants

We aimed to delineate the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit in all 173 healthy young adults with both 7T and 3T diffusion images included in the HCP database following the final S1200 release. HCP participant inclusion/exclusion criteria for recruitment are publicly available (Van Essen et al., 2013). Briefly, exclusion criteria comprised significant history of psychiatric disorders, substance use disorders, neurological or cardiovascular disease, epilepsy, any genetic disorder, neurodegenerative disease, traumatic brain injury, ongoing chemo- and/or immunotherapy, and MRI contraindications. Readers interested in the full exclusion criteria are encouraged to refer to supplemental table 1 in Van Essen et al. (2013).

Eight participants were excluded: did not have dMRI data at 7T (n = 2), registration failure (n = 5), and the CN V could not be visualized (n = 1). The final sample included 165 participants (101 females, 64 males). HCP only provides age range categories for participants (22–25, 26–30, 31–35, 36+ years of age). We provide a breakdown of participants in each category, stratified by sex (see Table 1).

Table 1.

Age distribution in the HCP S1200 release with both 7T and 3T dMRI and T1 data included in this study.

Age group (years)MaleFemaleWhole group
22–25 17 18 
26–30 33 47 80 
31–35 14 51 65 
36+ 
Age group (years)MaleFemaleWhole group
22–25 17 18 
26–30 33 47 80 
31–35 14 51 65 
36+ 

2.2 HCP imaging parameters

All participants in this study underwent MRI scanning at both 3T and 7T. The 3T scans were acquired at the Washington University in St. Louis, using a customized Siemens 3T “Connectome Skyra,” with a standard 32-channel head coil and a body transmission coil. Participants were then flown to the Center for Magnetic Resonance, University of Minnesota for 7T scans acquired with a Siemens Magnetom scanner. A single-channel transmit/32-channel receive head coil (Nova Medical, Wilmington, DE, USA) was used.

Whole brain structural T1 scans were acquired at 3T using a 3D MPRAGE sequence: repetition time (TR) = 2,400 ms, echo time (TE) = 2.14 ms, field of view (FOV) = 224 × 224, and 0.7 mm isotropic voxels. 7T spin-echo EPI diffusion-weighted scans were collected over four runs with the following parameters: TR = 7,000 ms, TE = 71.2 ms, FOV = 210 × 210, 1.05 mm isotropic voxels, and 132 slices. These were acquired with two sets of gradient tables, each with two different b-values (b = 1,000 s/mm2 and b = 2,000 s/mm2) interspersed with an equal number of acquisitions on each shell within each run. The uniform distribution of directions across shells was ensured with the Emmanuel Caruyer toolbox (Caruyer et al., 2013). Each set included 65 diffusion-weighted directions and 6 non-diffusion-weighted images (B0s) interspersed across each run. Two of the four acquisitions were performed once with each anterior-to-posterior and the other two with posterior-to-anterior encoding polarities. 3T spin-echo EPI diffusion-weighted scans were collected over six runs with the following parameters: TR = 5,520 ms, TE = 89.5 ms, FOV = 210 × 180, 1.25 mm isotropic voxels, and 111 slices. These were acquired with three sets of gradient tables, each with three different b-values (b = 1,000 s/mm2, b = 2,000 s/mm2, and b = 3,000 s/mm2) interspersed with an equal number of acquisitions on each shell within each run. The uniform distribution of directions across shells was ensured with the Emmanuel Caruyer toolbox. Each set included 90 diffusion-weighted directions and 6 B0s interspersed across each run. Three of the six acquisitions were performed once with each anterior-to-posterior and the other three with posterior-to-anterior encoding polarities. The 1,200 Subjects Data Release Reference Manual by HCP can be consulted for further details on data acquisition (https://www.humanconnectome.org/storage/app/media/documentation/s1200/HCP_S1200_Release_Reference_Manual.pdf).

2.3 MRI and statistical analysis

2.3.1 HCP preprocessing

For each participant, we downloaded the preprocessed whole brain T1 scan (T1w_acpc_dc_restore.nii.gz) and the diffusion-weighted scans at 7T and 3T. The HCP pre-processing pipeline scripts are publicly available on Github (https://github.com/Washington-University/HCPpipelines). Details of the minimal preprocessing pipelines can be reviewed in Glasser et al. (2013).

Briefly, T1 images were corrected for gradient distortion and then aligned using a rigid-body alignment with 6 degrees of freedom (DOF) and averaged to create a single T1 image (if there was more than one run). The FMRIB software library (FSL, v 5.0.6; https://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl) Linear Image Registration Tool (FLIRT) (Jenkinson et al., 2002, 2012; Smith et al., 2004) was used to register the T1 image to the Montreal Neurological Institutes (MNI) standardized space template using 12 DOF.

For dMRIs, FSL was used to normalize B0 intensity using FSL’s Diffusion Toolbox (FDT) (Jenkinson et al., 2012), after which susceptibility-induced B0 field deviations were calculated. Eddy current distortion and participant motion were corrected using the eddy tool in FDT (Andersson & Sotiropoulos, 2016). After correcting for these deviations, the diffusion-weighted image was resampled into the participant’s native space using FLIRT. A binary brain mask was generated for fibre orientation estimation using FSL’s BEDPOSTx tool (Behrens et al., 2003, 2007).

2.4 Study-specific preprocessing

We employed a liberal skull-stripping approach for dMRI scans to ensure the inclusion of the CN V in the resultant brain mask using FSL’s brain extraction tool (BET v6.0.3) (Jenkinson et al., 2005). Each skull-stripped B0 scan was quality controlled to ensure the inclusion of bilateral CN V. In cases where the full CN V was not included by BET, we manually adjusted the masks to reincorporate the CN V. T1-weighted scans were skull stripped using the SynthStrip toolbox (Hoopes et al., 2022) in FreeSurfer v7.3.2 (Fischl, 2012). DMRIs were aligned to T1 images with affine registration using FLIRT (Jenkinson et al., 2002). Linear transformations were used to align T1 images to the 1 mm MNI152 template. A concatenated matrix to register dMRI images to the MNI template and inverse registration matrices were computed. Probabilistic CeA, BLAT, PAG, and lPBN seeds were transformed from MNI space to diffusion space for each participant. These were visually inspected for anatomical accuracy. A tensor was fit using FSL’s DTIFIT to visualize major fibre orientations for the entire brain. CN V seeds and exclusion masks were manually drawn. See MRI and Statistical Analysis: Probabilistic Tractography for details. Two principal fibre directions were modelled for every voxel using BEDPOSTx. Lastly, we used Probtrackx (Behrens et al., 2007) to perform tractography and determine connectivity strength between our regions of interest (ROIs). The resulting tracts were resampled from diffusion space to MNI space for visualization purposes.

2.5 Regions of interest definition

Figure 1 provides a schematic of the ROIs used in the study.

Fig. 1.

Seeds and exclusion masks used in tractography. (A) Central (in yellow) and basolateral (in teal) amygdala (CeA and BLAT, respectively) shown on an axial T1-weighted image in MNI152 space. The cisternal plane seed (in yellow) and root entry zone (in pink) for the trigeminal nerve (CN V) are shown in a participant’s native diffusion space. (B) Lateral parabrachial (lPBN) nucleus shown in green on a T1-weighted image in MNI152 space. (C) Exclusion masks used to constrain tractography are shown on a T1-weighted image in MNI152 space. Exclusion planes of the superior cerebellar peduncle and the cerebellum, and seeds of the periaqueductal gray and the region peripheral to the CN V root-entry zone (periREZ) are shown in red. An exclusion mask of ventrolateral aspect of the temporal lobe is shown in pink. TL: temporal lobe, periREZ: outside perimeter of the CN V root entry zone. MNI coordinates can be found below each brain slice.

Fig. 1.

Seeds and exclusion masks used in tractography. (A) Central (in yellow) and basolateral (in teal) amygdala (CeA and BLAT, respectively) shown on an axial T1-weighted image in MNI152 space. The cisternal plane seed (in yellow) and root entry zone (in pink) for the trigeminal nerve (CN V) are shown in a participant’s native diffusion space. (B) Lateral parabrachial (lPBN) nucleus shown in green on a T1-weighted image in MNI152 space. (C) Exclusion masks used to constrain tractography are shown on a T1-weighted image in MNI152 space. Exclusion planes of the superior cerebellar peduncle and the cerebellum, and seeds of the periaqueductal gray and the region peripheral to the CN V root-entry zone (periREZ) are shown in red. An exclusion mask of ventrolateral aspect of the temporal lobe is shown in pink. TL: temporal lobe, periREZ: outside perimeter of the CN V root entry zone. MNI coordinates can be found below each brain slice.

Close modal

2.5.1 CN V

The cisternal plane (CP) and the root entry zone (REZ) of the CN V were used as a proxy for the trigeminal ganglion to capture trigeminal afferents coursing to the central nervous system (Fig. 1A). Recent work shows that a two-ROI method is superior to both single-ROI and three-ROI methods for tracking the trigeminal nerve (Xie et al., 2020). Additionally, the REZ was used as a waypoint to ensure that samples were propagated towards the brainstem. The first eigenvector image produced by the tensor fit was modulated by fractional anisotropy values to visualize fibre direction with colour. The CN V was then located in the axial plane. A 2 x 2 x 2 cube (8 voxels, 9.261 mm3) was drawn at the CN V REZ. Then, a 1 x 4 x 4 CP ROI was drawn anterior to the REZ (16 voxels, 18.522 mm3). We located the widest fanning segment of CN V fibres anterior to the REZ and outside the temporal lobes when picking the location of CP. This process was performed bilaterally.

2.5.2 Amygdala

The Tyszka and Pauli (2016) atlas provides probabilistic ROIs for amygdalar subnuclei in standard MNI space. This atlas is based on a sample of 168 healthy adults with an age range of 22–35 years from the HCP database. Two seeds, CeA and basolateral amygdala (BLAT), were used in probabilistic tractography as final targets and the origin when propagating putative tracts in an ascending, (i.e., brainstem to subcortex) and descending manner (i.e., subcortex to brainstem), respectively (Fig. 1A). Several naming conventions exist for the amygdalar basolateral complex (LeDoux, 2007). To avoid confusion, we followed the classifications used in this probabilistic atlas. As such, the BLAT seed in this study does not include the lateral and accessory basal/basomedial subnuclei. Additionally, we chose to remove the parvocellular division of the basolateral nucleus from the BLAT seed, since the developers of the atlas noted that this specific nucleus was merged into an unresolved nucleus (i.e., paralaminar) when creating the final seeds for their probabilistic atlas. In short, the BLAT seed in this study included the fully defined dorsal and intermediate divisions of the basolateral nucleus.

2.6 Lateral parabrachial nucleus & periaqueductal grey

The Brainstem Navigator atlas (v0.9; https://www.nitrc.org/projects/brainstemnavig/) provides probabilistic ROIs for brainstem subnuclei crucial for sensorimotor, arousal and autonomic functions in MNI space (Bianciardi et al., 2015). Semi-automatic and manual segmentations of these nuclei were carried out using 7T, multi-contrast (T2 and diffusion fractional anisotropy) MRI data from in vivo to generate the seeds. In this study, the 35% thresholded lPBN seeds were used as waypoints in probabilistic tractography (Fig. 1B). The probabilistic periaqueductal grey (PAG) ROI was thresholded at 50% to generate an exclusion mask (Fig. 1C). The difference in threshold values between the seeds is related to the size and location of these brain regions. The lPBN comprises a relatively small patch of cells located at the boundary between the superior cerebellar peduncle and the cerebral aqueduct—an area prone to imaging distortions. Thus, we employed a liberal threshold to ensure that the ROI would capture the lPBN in each individual after transformation to individual space. Given that the PAG ROI is used as an exclusion mask, we employed a more conservative threshold to reduce the risk of false negatives. The specific atlas labels for the lPBN seeds in this atlas are LPB-l and LPB-r, and PAG for the PAG seed. All amygdalar and brainstem ROIs were binarized.

2.7 Probabilistic tractography

We performed probabilistic tractography to assess CN V–lPBN–CeA connectivity. The CN V–lPBN–BLAT served as a control circuit since CeA is the only amygdalar subnucleus with dense connectivity with the brainstem (McDonald, 2020). Each participant had a total of eight tractograms: within one hemisphere, fibres were constructed in both directions (i.e., Origin-to-Target; Target-to-Origin) for each circuit to account for directional biases during acquisition (Van Essen et al., 2014) and fibre fanning (Jeurissen et al., 2019). This resulted in four tractograms per hemisphere. We used the modified Euler algorithm and set the number of samples to 10,000. A curvature threshold of 0.1 was used to allow for sharper turns for paths crossing from brainstem to subcortical regions. Path distribution was corrected for the length of the pathways.

Tract propagation was further refined using exclusion planes to limit the boundaries of the path distribution space in the brain, and by incorporating waypoints as relays that had to be crossed to reach a target (Fig. 1C). Specifically:

  1. A midline mask was drawn in diffusion space to constrain tracts to a single hemisphere.

  2. An axial plane below the rostrum of the corpus callosum was drawn in diffusion space to discard projections from CeA to the neocortex.

  3. A coronal plane across the superior cerebellar peduncle was drawn in diffusion space to discard cerebellar fibres. We ensured that there was no contiguity between the lPBN seeds and this exclusion plane for each participant.

  4. An axial pontine plane was drawn above the medulla oblongata in diffusion space to remove pyramidal and spinothalamic fibres.

  5. Due to PAG’s extensive projections to the lPBN (Krout et al., 1998), we added the PAG seed as an exclusion seed while propagating tracts.

  6. An exclusion mask was manually drawn in diffusion space to fill in the areas containing cerebrospinal fluid in Meckel’s cave. This “periREZ” seed ensured that the propagated fibres would not traverse across anatomically implausible locations at the brainstem–cerebrospinal fluid boundaries. We ensured that there was no contiguity between the trigeminal and waypoint seeds and the periREZ seed for each participant.

  7. An exclusion mask of the ventromedial aspect of the temporal lobe (i.e., the parahippocampal gyrus and the temporal pole; TL block) was manually drawn on the same axial slices where the periREZ seed was present. The TLBlock was used to ensure that putative tracts followed anatomically plausible trajectories when ascending and descending towards their target. We effectively constrained the trajectory of the tracts to the brainstem–subcortex axis by blocking the anatomically implausible tract propagation directly to the cortex, without first traversing across the brainstem and the subcortex.

  8. A probabilistic mask of the CN V motor nucleus from a previous study (Kaya et al., 2023) was thresholded at 50% and used as an exclusion mask to discard pontine CN V fibres (Guberinic et al., 2020).

  9. To ensure that tracts did not propagate past CeA or CP depending on the direction in which fibres were propagated, we set the target seed both as a waypoint and a termination mask.

Additionally, REZ and lPBN seeds were included as waypoint masks independent of directionality. Ascending tracts were propagated from CP towards REZ, then lPBN, and eventually to their amygdalar target. Tracts in the opposing direction originated in the amygdala ROI (CeA or BLAT) propagated to the lPBN, then the REZ, and terminated at CP.

2.8 Statistical analyses

We quantified the connectivity strength for the circuits in the study using the “waytotal count” metric generated by the probabilistic tractography algorithm. This count is equal to the number of streamlines that reach the final target seed in accordance with pre-defined user criteria (see section Probabilistic Tractography for more details). Initially, the total number of streamlines is equal to the product of the number of voxels in the seed of origin and the number of total streamlines to be used in propagation, which was set to 10,000 in this study. However, given the differences between the number of voxels in the trigeminal and amygdalar seeds, we normalized the number of streamlines that reached the target by dividing the waytotal count by the number of voxels in the initial seed. These normalized waytotal counts between the same origin and target seeds (e.g., Right CN V to Right CeA, Right CeA to Right CN V) were averaged. In the end, there were four probabilistic connectivity strength measurements, that is, waytotal counts, per participant: Right CN V–lPBN–CeA, Right CN V–lPBN–BLAT, Left CN V–lPBN–CeA, and Left CN V–lPBN–BLAT. Shapiro–Wilk tests were run to assess normality (p < 0.05). Given that data were not normally distributed, we performed Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare the connectivity strength of the CN V–lPBN–CeA and CN V–lPBN–BLAT circuits in each hemisphere. We used a Bonferroni-adjusted alpha of 0.025 since two statistical comparisons were run within the same magnetic field strength (i.e., right vs. left hemisphere in both 7T and 3T).

We then grouped our data in a sex-disaggregated manner, that is, males versus females, at 7T and 3T. Shapiro–Wilk tests were run to assess normality (p < 0.05). Given that data were non-normally distributed, we computed Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to determine whether the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit had stronger connectivity strength than the control circuit within each sex. We used a Bonferroni-adjusted alpha of p = 0.025 since two statistical comparisons were run within the same magnetic field strength. Lastly, we computed four Mann–Whitney U tests—two per magnetic field strength, to test for sex differences in the connectivity strength of the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit.

3.1 Outliers and normality testing

Data points 3 standard deviations above the mean were removed prior to statistical analyses. After outlier removal, final sample sizes were 150 (56 M, 94 F) and 155 (59 M, 96 F) at 7T and 3T, respectively. For brevity, the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit and the CN V–lPBN–BLAT circuit are referred to as the CeA circuit and the BLAT circuit, respectively, in the results section.

At 7T, connectivity strengths for both circuits diverged significantly from a normal distribution in both hemispheres; Right CeA7T: S-W150 = 0.720, p < 0.001; Right BLAT7T: S-W150 = 0.713, p < 0.001; Left CeA7T: S-W150 = 0.681, p < 0.001; Left BLAT7T: S-W150 = 0.674, p < 0.001. Similarly, at 3T connectivity strengths for both circuits diverged significantly from normal distribution in both hemispheres; Right CeA3T: S-W155 = 0.667, p < 0.001; Right BLAT3T: S-W155 = 0.725, p < 0.001; Left CeA3T: S-W155 = 0.742, p < 0.001; Left BLAT3T: S-W155 = 0.649, p < 0.001.

3.2 Connectivity strength differences between the CeA circuit and the BLAT circuit

At 7T, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests revealed stronger connectivity for the CeA circuit, than for the control BLAT circuit in both hemispheres (Right CeA7T vs. Right BLAT7T: W = 10,060, p < 0.001; Left CeA7T vs. Left BLAT7T: W = 10,132, p < 0.001; Fig. 2A). The median (±Interquartile range; IQR) connectivity strength for each circuit were Right CeA7T = 0.713 (1.51), Right BLAT7T = 0.0976 (0.221), Left CeA7T = 0.909 (2.39), Left BLAT7T = 0.0903 (0.239).

Fig. 2.

The CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit has stronger connectivity than the CN V–lPBN–BLAT circuit at both 7T and 3T. Median and the interquartile ranges for both circuits in the right and left hemispheres at (A) 7T and (B) 3T. Wilcoxon signed-rank comparisons reveal that in both hemispheres and for each field strength, the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit has stronger connectivity than the CN V–lPBN–BLAT circuit.

Fig. 2.

The CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit has stronger connectivity than the CN V–lPBN–BLAT circuit at both 7T and 3T. Median and the interquartile ranges for both circuits in the right and left hemispheres at (A) 7T and (B) 3T. Wilcoxon signed-rank comparisons reveal that in both hemispheres and for each field strength, the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit has stronger connectivity than the CN V–lPBN–BLAT circuit.

Close modal

At 3T, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests revealed that the CeA circuit had stronger connectivity than the control BLAT circuit in both hemispheres (Right CeA3T vs. Right BLAT3T: W = 8,411, p < 0.001; Left CeA3T vs. Left BLAT3T: W = 9,994, p < 0.001; Fig. 2B). The median (±IQR) connectivity strength for each circuit were Right CeA3T = 0.588 (1.43), Right BLAT3T = 0.314 (0.654), Left CeA3T = 1.465 (2.80), Left BLAT3T = 0.399 (0.598).

3.3 Sex differences in connectivity strength

3.3.1 Sex-disaggregated comparisons

We first assessed whether the data were normally distributed within each sex. At 7T, connectivity strengths for all four circuits diverged significantly from normal distribution in females: Right CeA7T: S-W94 = 0.678, p < 0.001; Right BLAT7T: S-W94 = 0.729, p < 0.001; Left CeA7T: S-W94 = 0.708, p < 0.001; Left BLAT7T: S-W94 = 0.762, p < 0.001; and in males: Right CeA7T: S-W56 = 0.778, p < 0.001; Right BLAT7T: S-W56 = 0.748, p < 0.001; Left CeA7T: S-W56 = 0.633, p < 0.001; Left BLAT7T: S-W56 = 0.620, p < 0.001.

We then compared the connectivity strength of each circuit within each sex using the non-parametric Wilcoxon rank test, with significance set at a Bonferroni-corrected alpha of 0.025 (0.05/2). In females, the CeA circuit had stronger connectivity than the BLAT circuit in both hemispheres (right: W = 3,798, p < 0.001; left: W = 4,003, p < 0.001. We observed the same results in males (right: W = 1,491, p < 0.001; left: W = 1,415, p < 0.001). Therefore, the CeA circuit had stronger connectivity than the control circuit, both at the whole-group level and within each sex at 7T.

We then compared the connectivity strength of the CeA circuit between sexes with a Mann–Whitney U test, with significance set to alpha = 0.025. We found no sex differences in the connectivity strength of this circuit at 7T: Right CeAM vs Right CeAF: U = 2,203, p = 0.095; and Left CeAM vs Left CeAF: U = 2,545, p = 0.735.

We repeated these same analyses at 3T. The connectivity strength of all four circuits were non-normally distributed in females: Right CeA3T: S-W96 = 0.616, p < 0.001; Right BLAT3T: S-W96 = 0.688, p < 0.001; Left CeA3T: S-W96 = 0.719, p < 0.001; Left BLAT3T: S-W96 = 0.652, p < 0.001; and in males: Right CeA3T: S-W59 = 0.710, p < 0.001; Right BLAT3T: S-W59 = 0.833, p < 0.001; Left CeA3T: S-W59 = 0.767, p < 0.001; Left BLAT3T: S-W59 = 0.737, p < 0.001.

Next, we compared the connectivity strength of each circuit within each sex with a Wilcoxon rank test. Significance was set at a Bonferroni-corrected alpha of 0.025 (0.05/2). In females, the CeA circuit showed stronger connectivity than the BLAT circuit in both hemispheres (Right: W = 2,944, p = 0.014; Left: W = 3,811, p < 0.001). In males, the CeA circuit showed stronger connectivity than the BLAT circuit in both hemispheres (Right: W = 1,393, p < 0.001; Left: W = 1,486, p < 0.001). Therefore, the CeA circuit had significantly stronger connectivity than the BLAT circuit at the whole-group level and within each sex at 3T.

Finally, we compared the connectivity strength of the CeA circuit between the sexes with a Mann–Whitney U test with alpha = 0.025. There were no sex differences in the connectivity strength of this circuit in the left hemisphere: U = 2,827, p = 0.985. The right CeA circuit had stronger connectivity in males than in females with U = 1,987, p = 0.002. In males, the median (±IQR) connectivity strength of this circuit was 1.07 (2.47), whereas for females the median (±IQR) connectivity strength was 0.375 (1.04).

3.4  Visualizing the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit

We thresholded each participant’s circuit tractograms prior to concatenating these across participants to visualize the circuit at the group level. Here, origin-to-target circuit tractograms were thresholded by the number of voxels in the origin seed multiplied by the number of samples per voxel (i.e., 10,000) at 0.2%. Then, the images for both directions of tractography were averaged, binarized, and resampled to standard space to collate them across participants. This process resulted in four final tractograms per field strength: Right CeA, Left CeA, Right BLAT, and Left BLAT. These group tractograms do not include data from participants with waytotal counts that were outliers.

We successfully delineated and visualized the CeA circuit in both hemispheres at 7T (Fig. 3) and 3T (Fig. 4).

Fig. 3.

The CN V–lPBN–CeA can be delineated in vivo using ultra-high field 7T images. Group tractograms are based on N = 150, thresholded to show at least 25% overlap across participants. (A) and (B) show the right and left circuits, respectively. (C) illustrates passage of the tracts through the lateral parabrachial nuclei and termination in CeA in concordance with the waypoint and termination specifications in the probabilistic tractography algorithm, respectively. The group tractograms were resampled from diffusion space to the standard MNI space using a linear transform.

Fig. 3.

The CN V–lPBN–CeA can be delineated in vivo using ultra-high field 7T images. Group tractograms are based on N = 150, thresholded to show at least 25% overlap across participants. (A) and (B) show the right and left circuits, respectively. (C) illustrates passage of the tracts through the lateral parabrachial nuclei and termination in CeA in concordance with the waypoint and termination specifications in the probabilistic tractography algorithm, respectively. The group tractograms were resampled from diffusion space to the standard MNI space using a linear transform.

Close modal
Fig. 4.

The CN V–lPBN–CeA can be delineated in vivo using 3T images. Group tractograms are based on N = 155, thresholded to show at least 25% overlap across participants. (A) and (B) show the right and left circuits, respectively. (C) illustrates passage of the tracts through the lateral parabrachial nuclei and termination in CeA in concordance with the waypoint and termination specifications in the probabilistic tractography algorithm, respectively. The group tractograms were resampled from diffusion space to the standard MNI space using a linear transform.

Fig. 4.

The CN V–lPBN–CeA can be delineated in vivo using 3T images. Group tractograms are based on N = 155, thresholded to show at least 25% overlap across participants. (A) and (B) show the right and left circuits, respectively. (C) illustrates passage of the tracts through the lateral parabrachial nuclei and termination in CeA in concordance with the waypoint and termination specifications in the probabilistic tractography algorithm, respectively. The group tractograms were resampled from diffusion space to the standard MNI space using a linear transform.

Close modal

In this study, we successfully delineated for the first time the CN V–lPBN–CeA pathway in humans at 7T. We then repeated this at the more readily available 3T field strength. Furthermore, given emerging evidence of sexually dimorphic pain mechanisms, we tested for sex differences in connectivity strength of the circuit. We did not identify sex differences at 7T but did find that the right CN V–lPBN–CeA pathway had significantly stronger connectivity in males than in females at 3T.

Preclinical models have significantly advanced our understanding of the neural basis of behaviour (Galvan et al., 2018; Vaidya et al., 2019). Methods such as retro/anterograde labelling, optogenetics, and chemogenetics require that neural tissue be probed invasively. Although preclinical trials are proposed to introduce the first-ever use of some of these methods in the human nervous system, regulatory and financial challenges remain significant, and vectors still need to be introduced invasively (Bansal et al., 2023; Claes et al., 2022; White et al., 2020). However, not all neural circuits are maintained across species. Therefore, it is essential to determine whether circuits and mechanisms identified in animal models can be resolved in humans. Non-invasive imaging approaches provide an opportunity to safely investigate the neural architecture of the human connectome in vivo. The proliferation of open-source databases such as the Human Connectome Project (HCP) (Van Essen et al., 2013) and probabilistic atlases for brain regions (Cauzzo et al., 2022; Singh et al., 2020; Tang et al., 2018; Tyszka & Pauli, 2016) allow us to construct putative white matter circuits informed by findings in the preclinical literature.

In the current study, we utilized significant increases in image resolution in ultra-high field (UHF) 7T dMRI from the HCP to counteract constraints inherent to brainstem imaging and probabilistic tractography such as weak contrast between white and grey matter (Sclocco et al., 2018) and fibre-fanning (Jeurissen et al., 2019), respectively. Although 7T machines are becoming more available, 3T scanners remain significantly more accessible and cost-effective (Ladd, 2007). The main benefits of UHF imaging are a higher signal-to-noise ratio and higher spatial resolution than 3T, allowing for better visualization of smaller structures and an increased ability to differentiate different tissue types (Sclocco et al., 2018). These two advantages are integral to imaging brainstem nuclei. However, UHF imaging is prone to susceptibility-induced geometric distortions and reduces signal uniformity (Jones et al., 2021).

The successful delineation of white matter circuits with dMRI at 7T can then be replicated in the more conventionally available 3T field strength, allowing for more research on their structural and functional features. This approach was used to delineate connectivity within the basal ganglia (Shim & Baek, 2022), insula–cingulate cortex projections (Cormie et al., 2023), and trigeminal circuits (Kaya et al., 2023). We note that statistical comparisons between the two field strengths should be interpreted with caution due to differences in acquisition parameters (e.g., voxel size, number of diffusion-weighted directions—a limitation of the HCP dataset). Nonetheless, these studies report overall qualitative and, when applicable, quantitative agreement between the delineated tracts at 3T and 7T. In the current study, we delineated the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit in the more conventionally available 3T field strength, showing that UHF imaging is not necessary to delineate the tract. The current proof-of-concept study highlights the possibility of investigating the functional role of this circuit in the affective dimension of pain in humans at both 7T and 3T.

The CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit is thought to contribute to the heightened affective response elicited by orofacial pain. Specifically, the amygdala is responsible for assigning an emotional value to environmental stressors (LeDoux, 2007). In the context of pain, the functional role of the amygdala is thought to be related to enhanced suffering, fear of pain, and the initiation of motivational drive to mount nocifensive behaviours (Neugebauer, 2015). The CeA projects to several brainstem nuclei to modulate autonomic and motor responses to stimuli (Pitkänen et al., 1997). The capsular and lateral subnuclei of CeA are dubbed the “nociceptive amygdala” due to the direct excitatory inputs from the parabrachial nucleus (PB) (Allen et al., 2021). Similar to the amygdala, the lPBN plays an integrative role in modulating behavioural outputs in response to internal and external stressors, such as pain (Chiang et al., 2019). The extensive lPBN connections to CeA have been shown to be critical for avoidance and aversive memory in response to noxious stimulation in rodents (Chiang et al., 2020; Gauriau & Bernard, 2002; Neugebauer, 2015; Neugebauer et al., 2004; Palmiter, 2018). An inhibitory CeA–PB pathway has been proposed to modulate pain behaviours in tandem with the excitatory lPBN–CeA connections in rats and mice (Raver et al., 2020). Here, optogenetic activation of the inhibitory CeA–PB pathway was associated with a decrease in facial grimaces—a proxy for negative pain affect in rodents (Langford et al., 2010). Preclinical work has, therefore, outlined the critical involvement of the CeA–PB circuity in modulating affective responses to noxious input. However, the source of such noxious inputs might be just as crucial as the two brain regions mentioned.

There is substantial neuroanatomical evidence indicating that pain from the face versus the rest of the body is processed differently in the lPBN. In rodents, lPBN receives polymodal nociceptive input from lamina 1 neurons in the dorsal horn (Craig, 1995; Hermanson & Blomqvist, 1996). In comparison, orofacial nociceptive information gets transmitted via the trigeminal brainstem sensory nuclear complex (VBSNC). The VBSNC comprises the trigeminal main sensory nucleus, as well as the spinal trigeminal nucleus, which is made up of three subnuclei: oralis, interpolaris, and caudalis (Sessle, 2000). The entire complex receives noxious input from the periphery but the caudalis contains two overlapping somatotopic maps of the orofacial region (Dejerine, 1926). This organization is unique and might contribute to the enhanced importance of the orofacial region in psychosocial functions. Second-order afferents emerge from the VBSNC and project further to other brain regions. Although spinal and trigeminal nociceptive input overlap partially in PBN, in the lPBN these show anatomically segregated distributions (Slugg & Light, 1994), suggesting that bodily and orofacial pain are processed differentially here—much like in the ventrolateral thalamus. Tracing studies in rats show that the CeA and the PBN are connected via the spino (trigemino) –PBN–CeA circuit (Bernard et al., 1989; Jasmin et al., 1997; Ma & Peschanski, 1988). However, the neural circuity underlying enhanced affective responses to orofacial pain—as opposed to bodily pain—has remained an outstanding question.

Rodriguez et al. (2017) identified a direct monosynaptic circuit from the trigeminal ganglion to the external lPBN subnucleus, which bypasses the canonical VBSNC relay in mice. The authors then showed that awake-behaving mice emitted increased distress vocalizations, showed place preference in analgesic environments, and showed robust avoidance behaviours under optogenetic activation of the circuit—all indicators of negative affect. Another rodent study showed that external lPBN–CeA connectivity underlies the formation of aversive memory during Pavlovian threat conditioning (Han et al., 2015). Mice with the presynaptic functional inactivation of the lPBN–CeA circuit had intact responses to the sensory-discriminative components of pain, that is, hind paw lick latency. In contrast, nocifensive behaviours (i.e., escape jumping) were abolished. These results suggest that the spino(trigemino)–PBN–CeA pathway modulates affective responses to noxious stimuli in mice. However, it is unclear whether orofacial pain is indeed associated with enhanced negative affect in humans.

Few studies have investigated whether and how orofacial nociceptive input is processed differently than spinal nociceptive input in humans. Sambo, Liang et al. (2012) conducted two studies on the hand-blink reflex (HBR) to characterize the properties of the defensive peripersonal space (DPPS) surrounding the face. They first showed that the HBR had shorter onset latency, longer duration, and higher magnitude when the affected hand entered facial DPPS than when the hand was outside the DPPS (Sambo, Liang et al., 2012). These findings were later reproduced by Bufacchi (2017), Bufacchi and Iannetti (2016), and Bufacchi et al. (2016). In a follow-up study, they showed attenuation of this effect when a screen was placed between the hand and the face, which was accompanied by a significant decrease in perceived threat ratings for the screen versus no-screen conditions (Sambo, Forster et al., 2012). This suggests that the screen either interrupted the integration of visual and tactile input or, as posited by the authors, acted as a defensive shield against threats to the orofacial region. Finally, they showed that trigeminal neuralgia, a unilateral neuropathic pain disorder affecting the orofacial region, is associated with a unilateral expansion of the peripersonal space (Bufacchi, 2017; Bufacchi et al., 2017). Together, these data show that there is a unique DPPS for the orofacial region that can identify and integrate threats of potentially harmful stimuli towards it.

Further evidence for differential processing of noxious stimuli from the orofacial region comes from two studies that found that noxious heat delivered to the forehead was associated with higher fear of pain ratings and significantly higher within-subject sensitization than the identical stimulus delivered to the volar forearm (Schmidt et al., 2015). In a different study, capsaicin-induced hyperalgesia applied to the face elicited increased ipsilateral amygdalar activity in response to thermal and brush stimuli on the sensitized side compared with the control side (Moulton et al., 2007). Memory encoding for images associated with facial versus hand pain showed increased functional connectivity between the left amygdala and the visual processing, memory encoding, and object recognition areas (Schmidt et al., 2016, 2019). The authors speculated that these effects were due to higher fear elicited by the aversiveness and threat of facial pain. Considered together, these findings suggest an enhanced amygdalar response to orofacial pain illustrated by increased physiological, functional connectivity, and behavioural metrics in healthy individuals.

Chronic orofacial pain disorders disproportionately affect females, and given the enhanced negative effect, they may be at higher risk of greater suffering. (Shinal & Fillingim, 2007). Furthermore, emerging evidence indicates that there may be sex differences in the neural mechanisms of pain (Mogil et al., 2024; Osborne & Davis, 2022; Stratton et al., 2024). As such, we investigated whether there were sex differences in the connectivity strengths of the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuits at both 7T and 3T. We hypothesized that the circuit would have stronger connectivity in females than in males. We did not find sex differences at 7T. At 3T, however, the right CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit showed significantly stronger connectivity in males than in females. We cannot draw any meaningful conclusions about these differences, given that 7T and 3T images had different acquisition parameters. As such, we could not compute statistical comparisons between the two different field strengths. Rodriguez et al. (2017) used both females and males in their study but did not report sex differences. Therefore, the evidence for a potential sex difference in the connectivity strength of this circuit remains inconclusive.

4.1 Limitations and future work

Human neuroimaging studies are inherently coarser than rodent tracing studies. In the current study, tractography was carried out using the entire CeA, as the subnuclei cannot be resolved; whereas animal literature indicates that the capsular and lateral, but not the medial, subnuclei receive lPBN inputs. Similarly, we used an lPBN seed, whereas the Rodriguez et al. (2017) study found the external lPBN to be the region that relays orofacial nociceptive information to the CeA. To our knowledge, no probabilistic atlases to date provide seeds for subnuclei of these two regions, and it is not clear whether these could be reliably resolved with UHF MRI. We chose to assess unilateral direct CN V–lPBN–CeA connectivity in consideration of the rodent literature. Given that the spino-parabrachial tract comprised both ipsilateral and contralateral efferents from lPBN (Hermanson & Blomqvist, 1996; Slugg & Light, 1994), whether the novel CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit in humans has a contralateral component remains an outstanding question. This is likely, given the bilateral projections of trigeminal thalamic tracts (Henssen et al., 2016, 2019). Although the ipsi- and contralateral components of the spino-parabrachial pathway have been shown to subserve different nociceptive processes in rodents at the spinal level (Deng et al., 2020), whether such differences are found for the trigeminal system has yet to be explored.

Our findings rely heavily on the definition of the ROIs used to delineate the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit. Therefore, the choice of the atlas was carefully considered. For example, there are multiple ways to delineate amygdalar subnuclei. Automated segmentation methods, such as the amygdala parcellation in FreeSurfer, use algorithms to delineate amygdalar subnuclei based on templates (Saygin et al., 2017). Recent work shows that automated segmentation of amygdalar subnuclei is unreliable and lacks specificity (Kahhale et al., 2023). We opted to use the Tyszka–Pauli atlas as it was developed with the HCP 7T dataset and was delineated by neuroanatomical experts using the largest cohort of participants (n = 168) to create a probabilistic atlas of amygdala nuclei. Similarly, we used the Brainstem Navigator to derive lPBN and PAG ROIs for this study. Brainstem nuclei are very challenging to image due to their small size, the density of the number of nuclei in the brainstem region, and physiological noise (Sclocco et al., 2018). The Brainstem Imaging Laboratory addressed these challenges by obtaining ultra-high field 7T imaging data, manually delineating ROIs in these data, and validating the delineations in vivo and, for some nuclei, ex vivo. To date, the Brainstem Navigator atlas is the only publicly available atlas that has a mask for the lateral parabrachial nucleus. We encourage future studies to replicate our findings using different atlases and parcellation schemes.

Due to our inability to directly compare connectivity strength at 7T and 3T, we are not able to comment on potential sex differences in this circuit conclusively. We encourage future studies to investigate whether structural and/or functional differences can be identified across the CN V–lPBN–CeA circuit.

Rodent work in the last decade has provided specific neural circuity undergirding the affective dimension of nociceptive processing in the orofacial region. We provide the successful resolution of the CN V–lPBN–CeA white matter circuit in vivo for the first time at both 7T and 3T in humans. Future work involving human subjects can now investigate structural and functional differences along this pathway in experimental and clinical populations to further elucidate enhanced affect in response to orofacial pain.

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in the Human Connectome Project database at https://db.humanconnectome.org, HCP S1200 Release (February 2017). Code used in the study pipeline is publicly available at https://github.com/b2kaya/cnv-lpbn-cea.

Batu Kaya: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing—Original draft, Writing—Review & editing, Visualization. Omar Khalil: Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data curation, Writing—Original draft, Writing—Review & editing. Spencer S. Abssy: Writing—Original draft, Writing—Review & editing. Iacopo Cioffi: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Resources, Writing—Review & editing. Massieh Moayedi: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Resources, Writing—Original eraft, Writing—Review & editing, Supervision, Funding.

The authors have no conflicts to report.

Massieh Moayedi is supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant (RGPIN-2018-04908), the Bertha Rosenstadt Fund, and the SEED program funded by the Dental Research Institute at University of Toronto’s Faculty of Dentistry. He also holds a Canada Research Chair (NSERC, Tier 2) in Pain Neuroimaging. Batu Kaya holds a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) doctoral research award. Omar Khalil holds the NSERC Canada graduate scholarship (Master’s Program) and University of Toronto Centre for the Study of Pain Scientist award. Spencer S. Abssy holds an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. Iacopo Cioffi holds a CIHR project grant and is supported by the American Association of Orthodontists Foundation.

Data were provided by the Human Connectome Project, WU-Minn Consortium (Principal Investigators: David Van Essen and Kamil Ugurbil; NIH grant #1U54MH091657) funded by the 16 NIH Institutes and Centers that support the NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research; and by the McDonnell Center for Systems Neuroscience at Washington University.

Alhadeff
,
A. L.
,
Su
,
Z.
,
Hernandez
,
E.
,
Klima
,
M. L.
,
Phillips
,
S. Z.
,
Holland
,
R. A.
,
Guo
,
C.
,
Hantman
,
A. W.
,
De Jonghe
,
B. C.
, &
Betley
,
J. N.
(
2018
).
A neural circuit for the suppression of pain by a competing need state
.
Cell
,
173
(
1
),
140.e15
152.e15
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.02.057
Al-Khater
,
K. M.
, &
Todd
,
A. J.
(
2009
).
Collateral projections of neurons in laminae I, III, and IV of rat spinal cord to thalamus, periaqueductal gray matter, and lateral parabrachial area
.
Journal of Comparative Neurology
,
515
(
6
),
629
646
. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.22081
Allen
,
H. N.
,
Bobnar
,
H. J.
, &
Kolber
,
B. J.
(
2021
).
Left and right hemispheric lateralization of the amygdala in pain
.
Progress in Neurobiology
,
196
,
101891
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pneurobio.2020.101891
Andersson
,
J. L.
, &
Sotiropoulos
,
S. N.
(
2016
).
An integrated approach to correction for off-resonance effects and subject movement in diffusion MR imaging
.
NeuroImage
,
125
,
1063
1078
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.10.019
Auvray
,
M.
,
Myin
,
E.
, &
Spence
,
C.
(
2010
).
The sensory-discriminative and affective-motivational aspects of pain
.
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
,
34
(
2
),
214
223
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.07.008
Bansal
,
A.
,
Shikha
,
S.
, &
Zhang
,
Y.
(
2023
).
Towards translational optogenetics
.
Nature Biomedical Engineering
,
7
(
4
),
349
369
. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41551-021-00829-3
Behrens
,
T. E.
,
Berg
,
H. J.
,
Jbabdi
,
S.
,
Rushworth
,
M. F.
, &
Woolrich
,
M. W.
(
2007
).
Probabilistic diffusion tractography with multiple fibre orientations: What can we gain?
NeuroImage
,
34
(
1
),
144
155
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.09.018
Behrens
,
T. E.
,
Woolrich
,
M. W.
,
Jenkinson
,
M.
,
Johansen‐Berg
,
H.
,
Nunes
,
R. G.
,
Clare
,
S.
,
Matthews
,
P. M.
,
Brady
,
J. M.
, &
Smith
,
S. M.
(
2003
).
Characterization and propagation of uncertainty in diffusion‐weighted MR imaging
.
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine: An Official Journal of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
,
50
(
5
),
1077
1088
. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.10609
Bernard
,
J.
,
Peschanski
,
M.
, &
Besson
,
J.
(
1989
).
A possible spino (trigemino)-ponto-amygdaloid pathway for pain
.
Neuroscience Letters
,
100
(
1–3
),
83
88
. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3940(89)90664-2
Bernard
,
J. F.
,
Huang
,
G. F.
, &
Besson
,
J. M.
(
1994
).
The parabrachial area: Electrophysiological evidence for an involvement in visceral nociceptive processes
.
Journal of Neurophysiology
,
71
(
5
),
1646
1660
. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1994.71.5.1646
Bianciardi
,
M.
,
Toschi
,
N.
,
Edlow
,
B. L.
,
Eichner
,
C.
,
Setsompop
,
K.
,
Polimeni
,
J. R.
,
Brown
,
E. N.
,
Kinney
,
H. C.
,
Rosen
,
B. R.
, &
Wald
,
L. L.
(
2015
).
Toward an in vivo neuroimaging template of human brainstem nuclei of the ascending arousal, autonomic, and motor systems
.
Brain Connectivity
,
5
(
10
),
597
607
. https://doi.org/10.1089/brain.2015.0347
Bufacchi
,
R. J.
(
2017
).
Approaching threatening stimuli cause an expansion of defensive peripersonal space
.
Journal of Neurophysiology
,
118
(
4
),
1927
1930
. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00316.2017
Bufacchi
,
R. J.
, &
Iannetti
,
G. D.
(
2016
).
Gravitational cues modulate the shape of defensive peripersonal space
.
Current Biology
,
26
(
21
),
R1133
R1134
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.09.025
Bufacchi
,
R. J.
,
Liang
,
M.
,
Griffin
,
L. D.
, &
Iannetti
,
G. D.
(
2016
).
A geometric model of defensive peripersonal space
.
Journal of Neurophysiology
,
115
(
1
),
218
225
. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00691.2015
Bufacchi
,
R. J.
,
Sambo
,
C.
,
Di Stefano
,
G.
,
Cruccu
,
G.
, &
Iannetti
,
G.
(
2017
).
Pain outside the body: Defensive peripersonal space deformation in trigeminal neuralgia
.
Scientific Reports
,
7
(
1
),
12487
. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12466-5
Cantu
,
D. J.
,
Kaur
,
S.
,
Murphy
,
A. Z.
, &
Averitt
,
D. L.
(
2022
).
Sex differences in the amygdaloid projections to the ventrolateral periaqueductal gray and their activation during inflammatory pain in the rat
.
Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy
,
124
,
102123
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchemneu.2022.102123
Caruyer
,
E.
,
Lenglet
,
C.
,
Sapiro
,
G.
, &
Deriche
,
R.
(
2013
).
Design of multishell sampling schemes with uniform coverage in diffusion MRI
.
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
,
69
(
6
),
1534
1540
. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.24736
Catani
,
M.
(
2007
).
From hodology to function
.
Brain
,
130
(
Pt 3
),
602
605
. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awm008
Cauzzo
,
S.
,
Singh
,
K.
,
Stauder
,
M.
,
García-Gomar
,
M. G.
,
Vanello
,
N.
,
Passino
,
C.
,
Staab
,
J.
,
Indovina
,
I.
, &
Bianciardi
,
M.
(
2022
).
Functional connectome of brainstem nuclei involved in autonomic, limbic, pain and sensory processing in living humans from 7 Tesla resting state fMRI
.
NeuroImage
,
250
,
118925
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.118925
Chiang
,
M. C.
,
Bowen
,
A.
,
Schier
,
L. A.
,
Tupone
,
D.
,
Uddin
,
O.
, &
Heinricher
,
M. M.
(
2019
).
Parabrachial complex: A hub for pain and aversion
.
Journal of Neuroscience
,
39
(
42
),
8225
8230
. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.1162-19.2019
Chiang
,
M. C.
,
Nguyen
,
E. K.
,
Canto-Bustos
,
M.
,
Papale
,
A. E.
,
Oswald
,
A.-M. M.
, &
Ross
,
S. E.
(
2020
).
Divergent neural pathways emanating from the lateral parabrachial nucleus mediate distinct components of the pain response
.
Neuron
,
106
(
6
),
927.e25
939.e25
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2020.03.014
Claes
,
M.
,
De Groef
,
L.
, &
Moons
,
L.
(
2022
).
The DREADDful hurdles and opportunities of the chronic chemogenetic toolbox
.
Cells
,
11
(
7
),
1110
. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells11071110
Cormie
,
M. A.
,
Kaya
,
B.
,
Hadjis
,
G. E.
,
Mouseli
,
P.
, &
Moayedi
,
M.
(
2023
).
Insula-cingulate structural and functional connectivity: An ultra-high field MRI study
.
Cerebral Cortex
,
33
(
17
),
9787
9801
. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhad244
Craig
,
A.
(
1995
).
Distribution of brainstem projections from spinal lamina I neurons in the cat and the monkey
.
Journal of Comparative Neurology
,
361
(
2
),
225
248
. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.903610204
Dejerine
,
J. J.
(
1926
).
Sémiologie des affections du système nerveux
(2. ed.).
Masson
.
Deng
,
J.
,
Zhou
,
H.
,
Lin
,
J.-K.
,
Shen
,
Z.-X.
,
Chen
,
W.-Z.
,
Wang
,
L.-H.
,
Li
,
Q.
,
Mu
,
D.
,
Wei
,
Y.-C.
, &
Xu
,
X.-H.
(
2020
).
The parabrachial nucleus directly channels spinal nociceptive signals to the intralaminar thalamic nuclei, but not the amygdala
.
Neuron
,
107
(
5
),
909.e6
923.e6
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2020.06.017
Dyrby
,
T. B.
,
Søgaard
,
L. V.
,
Parker
,
G. J.
,
Alexander
,
D. C.
,
Lind
,
N. M.
,
Baaré
,
W. F.
,
Hay-Schmidt
,
A.
,
Eriksen
,
N.
,
Pakkenberg
,
B.
, &
Paulson
,
O. B.
(
2007
).
Validation of in vitro probabilistic tractography
.
NeuroImage
,
37
(
4
),
1267
1277
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.06.022
Fischl
,
B.
(
2012
).
FreeSurfer
.
NeuroImage
,
62
(
2
),
774
781
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.021
Fu
,
O.
,
Iwai
,
Y.
,
Kondoh
,
K.
,
Misaka
,
T.
,
Minokoshi
,
Y.
, &
Nakajima
,
K. I.
(
2019
).
SatB2-expressing neurons in the parabrachial nucleus encode sweet taste
.
Cell Reports
,
27
(
6
),
1650.e4
1656.e4
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2019.04.040
Galvan
,
A.
,
Caiola
,
M. J.
, &
Albaugh
,
D. L.
(
2018
).
Advances in optogenetic and chemogenetic methods to study brain circuits in non-human primates
.
Journal of Neural Transmission
,
125
,
547
563
. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-017-1697-8
Gauriau
,
C.
, &
Bernard
,
J.-F.
(
2002
).
Pain pathways and parabrachial circuits in the rat
.
Experimental Physiology
,
87
(
2
),
251
258
. https://doi.org/10.1113/eph8702357
Glasser
,
M. F.
,
Sotiropoulos
,
S. N.
,
Wilson
,
J. A.
,
Coalson
,
T. S.
,
Fischl
,
B.
,
Andersson
,
J. L.
,
Xu
,
J.
,
Jbabdi
,
S.
,
Webster
,
M.
, &
Polimeni
,
J. R.
(
2013
).
The minimal preprocessing pipelines for the Human Connectome Project
.
NeuroImage
,
80
,
105
124
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.127
Grigson
,
P. S.
,
Reilly
,
S.
,
Scalera
,
G.
, &
Norgren
,
R.
(
1998
).
The parabrachial nucleus is essential for acquisition of a conditioned odor aversion in rats
.
Behavioral Neuroscience
,
112
(
5
),
1104
1113
. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9829788
Guberinic
,
A.
,
Souverein
,
V.
,
Volkers
,
R.
,
van Cappellen van Walsum
,
A.-M.
,
Vissers
,
K. C.
,
Mollink
,
J.
, &
Henssen
,
D. J.
(
2020
).
Mapping the trigeminal root entry zone and its pontine fibre distribution patterns
.
Cephalalgia
,
40
(
14
),
1645
1656
. https://doi.org/10.1177/0333102420959796
Haggman-Henrikson
,
B.
,
Liv
,
P.
,
Ilgunas
,
A.
,
Visscher
,
C. M.
,
Lobbezoo
,
F.
,
Durham
,
J.
, &
Lovgren
,
A.
(
2020
).
Increasing gender differences in the prevalence and chronification of orofacial pain in the population
.
Pain
,
161
(
8
),
1768
1775
. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001872
Han
,
S.
,
Soleiman
,
M. T.
,
Soden
,
M. E.
,
Zweifel
,
L. S.
, &
Palmiter
,
R. D.
(
2015
).
Elucidating an affective pain circuit that creates a threat memory
.
Cell
,
162
(
2
),
363
374
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.057
Henssen
,
D. J. H. A.
,
Kurt
,
E.
,
Kozicz
,
T.
,
van Dongen
,
R.
,
Bartels
,
R. H. M. A.
, &
van Cappellen van Walsum
,
A. M
. (
2016
).
New insights in trigeminal anatomy: A double orofacial tract for nociceptive input
.
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
,
10
,
53
. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnana.2016.00053
Henssen
,
D. J. H. A.
,
Mollink
,
J.
,
Kurt
,
E.
,
van Dongen
,
R.
,
Bartels
,
R.
,
Grabetael
,
D.
,
Kozicz
,
T.
,
Axer
,
M.
, &
Van Cappellen van Walsum
,
A. M
. (
2019
).
Ex vivo visualization of the trigeminal pathways in the human brainstem using 11.7T diffusion MRI combined with microscopy polarized light imaging
.
Brain Structure and Function
,
224
(
1
),
159
170
. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-018-1767-1
Hermanson
,
O.
, &
Blomqvist
,
A.
(
1996
).
Subnuclear localization of FOS‐like immunoreactivity in the rat parabrachial nucleus after nociceptive stimulation
.
Journal of Comparative Neurology
,
368
(
1
),
45
56
. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1096-9861(19960422)368:1<45::aid-cne4>3.0.co;2-k
Hoopes
,
A.
,
Mora
,
J. S.
,
Dalca
,
A. V.
,
Fischl
,
B.
, &
Hoffmann
,
M.
(
2022
).
SynthStrip: Skull-stripping for any brain image
.
NeuroImage
,
260
,
119474
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119474
Jasmin
,
L.
,
Burkey
,
A. R.
,
Card
,
J. P.
, &
Basbaum
,
A. I.
(
1997
).
Transneuronal labeling of a nociceptive pathway, the spino-(trigemino-) parabrachio-amygdaloid, in the rat
.
Journal of Neuroscience
,
17
(
10
),
3751
3765
. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.17-10-03751.1997
Jenkinson
,
M.
,
Bannister
,
P.
,
Brady
,
M.
, &
Smith
,
S.
(
2002
).
Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images
.
NeuroImage
,
17
(
2
),
825
841
. https://doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2002.1132
Jenkinson
,
M.
,
Beckmann
,
C. F.
,
Behrens
,
T. E.
,
Woolrich
,
M. W.
, &
Smith
,
S. M.
(
2012
).
FSL
.
NeuroImage
,
62
(
2
),
782
790
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.015
Jenkinson
,
M.
,
Pechaud
,
M.
, &
Smith
,
S.
(
2005
).
BET2: MR-based estimation of brain, skull and scalp surfaces. Eleventh annual meeting of the organization for human brain mapping
. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1573950400559824000
Jeurissen
,
B.
,
Descoteaux
,
M.
,
Mori
,
S.
, &
Leemans
,
A.
(
2019
).
Diffusion MRI fiber tractography of the brain
.
NMR in Biomedicine
,
32
(
4
),
e3785
. https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.3785
Jones
,
S. E.
,
Lee
,
J.
, &
Law
,
M.
(
2021
).
Neuroimaging at 3T vs 7T: Is it really worth it?
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics
,
29
(
1
),
1
12
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2020.09.001
Kahhale
,
I.
,
Buser
,
N. J.
,
Madan
,
C. R.
, &
Hanson
,
J. L.
(
2023
).
Quantifying numerical and spatial reliability of hippocampal and amygdala subdivisions in FreeSurfer
.
Brain Informatics
,
10
(
1
),
9
. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40708-023-00189-5
Kaya
,
B.
,
Geha
,
P.
,
de Araujo
,
I.
,
Cioffi
,
I.
, &
Moayedi
,
M.
(
2023
).
Identification of central amygdala and trigeminal motor nucleus connectivity in humans: An ultra‐high field diffusion MRI study
.
Human Brain Mapping
,
44
(
4
),
1309
1319
. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.26104
Krout
,
K. E.
,
Jansen
,
A. S.
, &
Loewy
,
A. D.
(
1998
).
Periaqueductal gray matter projection to the parabrachial nucleus in rat
.
Journal of Comparative Neurology
,
401
(
4
),
437
454
. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1096-9861(19981130)401:4<437::aid-cne2>3.3.co;2-x
Ladd
,
M. E.
(
2007
).
High-field-strength magnetic resonance: Potential and limits
.
Topics in Magnetic Resonance Imaging
,
18
(
2
),
139
152
. https://doi.org/10.1097/rmr.0b013e3180f612b3
Langford
,
D. J.
,
Bailey
,
A. L.
,
Chanda
,
M. L.
,
Clarke
,
S. E.
,
Drummond
,
T. E.
,
Echols
,
S.
,
Glick
,
S.
,
Ingrao
,
J.
,
Klassen-Ross
,
T.
, &
LaCroix-Fralish
,
M. L.
(
2010
).
Coding of facial expressions of pain in the laboratory mouse
.
Nature Methods
,
7
(
6
),
447
449
. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.1455
LeDoux
,
J.
(
2007
).
The amygdala
.
Current Biology
,
17
(
20
),
R868
R874
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.08.005
Li
,
J. N.
, &
Sheets
,
P. L.
(
2020
).
Spared nerve injury differentially alters parabrachial monosynaptic excitatory inputs to molecularly specific neurons in distinct subregions of the central amygdala
.
Pain
,
161
(
1
),
166
176
. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001691
Ma
,
W.
, &
Peschanski
,
M.
(
1988
).
Spinal and trigeminal projections to the parabrachial nucleus in the rat: Electron-microscopic evidence of a spino-ponto-amygdalian somatosensory pathway
.
Somatosensory Research
,
5
(
3
),
247
257
. https://doi.org/10.3109/07367228809144629
McDonald
,
A. J.
(
2020
).
Functional neuroanatomy of the basolateral amygdala: Neurons, neurotransmitters, and circuits
.
Handbook of Behavioral Neuroscience
,
26
,
1
38
). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-815134-1.00001-5
Mogil
,
J. S.
,
Parisien
,
M.
,
Esfahani
,
S. J.
, &
Diatchenko
,
L.
(
2024
).
Sex differences in mechanisms of pain hypersensitivity
.
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
,
163
,
105749
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105749
Moulton
,
E. A.
,
Pendse
,
G.
,
Morris
,
S.
,
Strassman
,
A.
,
Aiello-Lammens
,
M.
,
Becerra
,
L.
, &
Borsook
,
D.
(
2007
).
Capsaicin-induced thermal hyperalgesia and sensitization in the human trigeminal nociceptive pathway: An fMRI study
.
NeuroImage
,
35
(
4
),
1586
1600
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.001
Mu
,
D.
,
Deng
,
J.
,
Liu
,
K. F.
,
Wu
,
Z. Y.
,
Shi
,
Y. F.
,
Guo
,
W. M.
,
Mao
,
Q. Q.
,
Liu
,
X. J.
,
Li
,
H.
, &
Sun
,
Y. G.
(
2017
).
A central neural circuit for itch sensation
.
Science
,
357
(
6352
),
695
699
. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf4918
Neugebauer
,
V.
(
2015
).
Amygdala pain mechanisms
. In
H. G.
Schaible
(Ed.),
Pain Control
(pp.
261
284
).
Springer
. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46450-2_13
Neugebauer
,
V.
,
Li
,
W.
,
Bird
,
G. C.
, &
Han
,
J. S.
(
2004
).
The amygdala and persistent pain
.
The Neuroscientist
,
10
(
3
),
221
234
. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073858403261077
Osborne
,
N. R.
, &
Davis
,
K. D.
(
2022
).
Sex and gender differences in pain
.
International Review of Neurobiology
,
164
,
277
307
. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.irn.2022.06.013
Palmiter
,
R. D.
(
2018
).
The parabrachial nucleus: CGRP neurons function as a general alarm
.
Trends in neurosciences
,
41
(
5
),
280
293
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2018.03.007
Parker
,
G.
(
2004
).
Analysis of MR diffusion weighted images
.
The British journal of radiology
,
77
(
Suppl. 2
),
S176
S185
. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/81090732
Pitkänen
,
A.
,
Savander
,
V.
, &
LeDoux
,
J. E.
(
1997
).
Organization of intra-amygdaloid circuitries in the rat: An emerging framework for understanding functions of the amygdala
.
Trends in Neurosciences
,
20
(
11
),
517
523
. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-2236(97)01125-9
Presto
,
P.
,
Mazzitelli
,
M.
,
Junell
,
R.
,
Griffin
,
Z.
, &
Neugebauer
,
V.
(
2022
).
Sex differences in pain along the neuraxis
.
Neuropharmacology
,
210
,
109030
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2022.109030
Raver
,
C.
,
Uddin
,
O.
,
Ji
,
Y.
,
Li
,
Y.
,
Cramer
,
N.
,
Jenne
,
C.
,
Morales
,
M.
,
Masri
,
R.
, &
Keller
,
A.
(
2020
).
An amygdalo-parabrachial pathway regulates pain perception and chronic pain
.
The Journal of Neuroscience
,
40
(
17
),
3424
3442
. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0075-20.2020
Rodriguez
,
E.
,
Sakurai
,
K.
,
Xu
,
J.
,
Chen
,
Y.
,
Toda
,
K.
,
Zhao
,
S.
,
Han
,
B.-X.
,
Ryu
,
D.
,
Yin
,
H.
, &
Liedtke
,
W.
(
2017
).
A craniofacial-specific monosynaptic circuit enables heightened affective pain
.
Nature Neuroscience
,
20
(
12
),
1734
1743
. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-017-0012-1
Sambo
,
C. F.
,
Forster
,
B.
,
Williams
,
S. C.
, &
Iannetti
,
G. D.
(
2012
).
To blink or not to blink: Fine cognitive tuning of the defensive peripersonal space
.
Journal of Neuroscience
,
32
(
37
),
12921
12927
. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0607-12.2012
Sambo
,
C. F.
,
Liang
,
M.
,
Cruccu
,
G.
, &
Iannetti
,
G. D.
(
2012
).
Defensive peripersonal space: The blink reflex evoked by hand stimulation is increased when the hand is near the face
.
Journal of Neurophysiology
,
107
(
3
),
880
889
. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00731.2011
Saygin
,
Z. M.
,
Kliemann
,
D.
,
Iglesias
,
J. E.
,
van der Kouwe
,
A. J.
,
Boyd
,
E.
,
Reuter
,
M.
,
Stevens
,
A.
,
Van Leemput
,
K.
,
McKee
,
A.
, &
Frosch
,
M. P.
(
2017
).
High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging reveals nuclei of the human amygdala: Manual segmentation to automatic atlas
.
NeuroImage
,
155
,
370
382
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.04.046
Schmidt
,
K.
,
Forkmann
,
K.
,
Schultz
,
H.
,
Gratz
,
M.
,
Bitz
,
A.
,
Wiech
,
K.
, &
Bingel
,
U.
(
2019
).
Enhanced neural reinstatement for evoked facial pain compared with evoked hand pain
.
The Journal of Pain
,
20
(
9
),
1057
1069
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2019.03.003
Schmidt
,
K.
,
Forkmann
,
K.
,
Sinke
,
C.
,
Gratz
,
M.
,
Bitz
,
A.
, &
Bingel
,
U.
(
2016
).
The differential effect of trigeminal vs. peripheral pain stimulation on visual processing and memory encoding is influenced by pain-related fear
.
NeuroImage
,
134
,
386
395
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.03.026
Schmidt
,
K.
,
Schunke
,
O.
,
Forkmann
,
K.
, &
Bingel
,
U.
(
2015
).
Enhanced short-term sensitization of facial compared with limb heat pain
.
The Journal of Pain
,
16
(
8
),
781
790
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2015.05.003
Sclocco
,
R.
,
Beissner
,
F.
,
Bianciardi
,
M.
,
Polimeni
,
J. R.
, &
Napadow
,
V.
(
2018
).
Challenges and opportunities for brainstem neuroimaging with ultrahigh field MRI
.
NeuroImage
,
168
,
412
426
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.02.052
Sessle
,
B. J.
(
2000
).
Acute and chronic craniofacial pain: Brainstem mechanisms of nociceptive transmission and neuroplasticity, and their clinical correlates
.
Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine
,
11
(
1
),
57
91
. https://doi.org/10.1177/10454411000110010401
Sessle
,
B. J.
(
2019
).
Somatosensory transmission in the trigeminal brainstem complex and its modulation by peripheral and central neural influences
. In
R.
Lydic
&
H. A.
Baghdovan
(Eds.),
Handbook of behavioral state control
(pp.
445
461
).
CRC Press
. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429114373
Sessle
,
B. J.
(
2021
).
Chronic orofacial pain: Models, mechanisms, and genetic and related environmental influences
.
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
,
22
(
13
),
7112
. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22137112
Shim
,
J.-H.
, &
Baek
,
H.-M.
(
2022
).
White matter connectivity between structures of the basal ganglia using 3T and 7T
.
Neuroscience
,
483
,
32
39
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2021.12.034
Shinal
,
R. M.
, &
Fillingim
,
R. B.
(
2007
).
Overview of orofacial pain: Epidemiology and gender differences in orofacial pain
.
Dental Clinics
,
51
(
1
),
1
18
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2006.09.004
Singh
,
K.
,
Indovina
,
I.
,
Augustinack
,
J. C.
,
Nestor
,
K.
,
García-Gomar
,
M. G.
,
Staab
,
J. P.
, &
Bianciardi
,
M.
(
2020
).
Probabilistic template of the lateral parabrachial nucleus, medial parabrachial nucleus, vestibular nuclei complex, and medullary viscero-sensory-motor nuclei complex in living humans from 7 Tesla MRI
.
Frontiers in Neuroscience
,
13
,
1425
. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.01425
Slugg
,
R. M.
, &
Light
,
A. R.
(
1994
).
Spinal cord and trigeminal projections to the pontine parabrachial region in the rat as demonstrated with Phaseolus vulgaris leucoagglutinin
.
Journal of Comparative Neurology
,
339
(
1
),
49
61
. https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.903390106
Smith
,
S. M.
,
Jenkinson
,
M.
,
Woolrich
,
M.
,
Beckmann
,
C. F.
,
Behrens
,
T. E.
,
Johansen-Berg
,
H.
,
Bannister
,
P. R.
,
De Luca
,
M.
,
Drobnjak
,
I.
,
Flitney
,
D. E.
,
Niazy
,
R.
,
Saunders
,
J.
,
Vickers
,
J.
,
Zhang
,
Y.
,
De Stefano
,
N.
,
Brady
,
J. M.
, &
Matthews
,
P. M.
(
2004
).
Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL
.
NeuroImage
,
23
(
S1
),
208
220
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051
Stratton
,
H.
,
Lee
,
G.
,
Dolatyari
,
M.
,
Ghetti
,
A.
,
Cotta
,
T.
,
Mitchell
,
S.
,
Yue
,
X.
,
Ibrahim
,
M.
,
Dumaire
,
N.
, &
Salih
,
L.
(
2024
).
Nociceptors are functionally male or female: From mouse to monkey to man
.
Brain
,
147
(
12
),
4280
4291
. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awae179
Sun
,
L.
,
Liu
,
R.
,
Guo
,
F.
,
Wen
,
M. Q.
,
Ma
,
X. L.
,
Li
,
K. Y.
,
Sun
,
H.
,
Xu
,
C. L.
,
Li
,
Y. Y.
,
Wu
,
M. Y.
,
Zhu
,
Z. G.
,
Li
,
X. J.
,
Yu
,
Y. Q.
,
Chen
,
Z.
,
Li
,
X. Y.
, &
Duan
,
S.
(
2020
).
Parabrachial nucleus circuit governs neuropathic pain-like behavior
.
Nature Communications
,
11
(
1
),
5974
. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19767-w
Tang
,
Y.
,
Sun
,
W.
,
Toga
,
A. W.
,
Ringman
,
J. M.
, &
Shi
,
Y.
(
2018
).
A probabilistic atlas of human brainstem pathways based on connectome imaging data
.
NeuroImage
,
169
,
227
239
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.042
Terrier
,
L.-M.
,
Hadjikhani
,
N.
, &
Destrieux
,
C.
(
2022
).
The trigeminal pathways
.
Journal of Neurology
,
269
(
7
),
3443
3460
. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-022-11002-4
Tyszka
,
J. M.
, &
Pauli
,
W. M.
(
2016
).
In vivo delineation of subdivisions of the human amygdaloid complex in a high‐resolution group template
.
Human Brain Mapping
,
37
(
11
),
3979
3998
. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23289
Uddin
,
O.
,
Studlack
,
P.
,
Akintola
,
T.
,
Raver
,
C.
,
Castro
,
A.
,
Masri
,
R.
, &
Keller
,
A.
(
2018
).
Amplified parabrachial nucleus activity in a rat model of trigeminal neuropathic pain
.
Neurobiology of Pain
,
3
,
22
30
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ynpai.2018.02.002
Vaidya
,
A. R.
,
Pujara
,
M. S.
,
Petrides
,
M.
,
Murray
,
E. A.
, &
Fellows
,
L. K.
(
2019
).
Lesion studies in contemporary neuroscience
.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
,
23
(
8
),
653
671
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.05.009
Van Essen
,
D. C.
,
Jbabdi
,
S.
,
Sotiropoulos
,
S. N.
,
Chen
,
C.
,
Dikranian
,
K.
,
Coalson
,
T.
,
Harwell
,
J.
,
Behrens
,
T. E.
, &
Glasser
,
M. F.
(
2014
).
Mapping connections in humans and non-human primates: Aspirations and challenges for diffusion imaging
. In
H.
Johansen-Berg
&
T. E. J.
Behrens
(Eds.),
Diffusion MRI
(pp.
337
358
).
Elsevier
. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-396460-1.00016-0
Van Essen
,
D. C.
,
Smith
,
S. M.
,
Barch
,
D. M.
,
Behrens
,
T. E.
,
Yacoub
,
E.
,
Ugurbil
,
K.
, &
Consortium
,
W.-M. H.
(
2013
).
The WU-Minn human connectome project: An overview
.
NeuroImage
,
80
,
62
79
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.041
White
,
M.
,
Mackay
,
M.
, &
Whittaker
,
R. G.
(
2020
).
Taking optogenetics into the human brain: Opportunities and challenges in clinical trial design
.
Open Access Journal of Clinical Trials
,
12
,
33
41
. https://doi.org/10.2147/oajct.s259702
Wilson
,
T. D.
,
Valdivia
,
S.
,
Khan
,
A.
,
Ahn
,
H. S.
,
Adke
,
A. P.
,
Martinez
Gonzalez
, S.,
Sugimura
,
Y. K.
, &
Carrasquillo
,
Y.
(
2019
).
Dual and opposing functions of the central amygdala in the modulation of pain
.
Cell Reports
,
29
(
2
),
332.e5
346.e5
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2019.09.011
Xie
,
G.
,
Zhang
,
F.
,
Leung
,
L.
,
Mooney
,
M. A.
,
Epprecht
,
L.
,
Norton
,
I.
,
Rathi
,
Y.
,
Kikinis
,
R.
,
Al-Mefty
,
O.
, &
Makris
,
N.
(
2020
).
Anatomical assessment of trigeminal nerve tractography using diffusion MRI: A comparison of acquisition b-values and single-and multi-fiber tracking strategies
.
NeuroImage: Clinical
,
25
,
102160
. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2019.102160
Zakrzewska
,
J. M.
,
Wu
,
J.
,
Mon-Williams
,
M.
,
Phillips
,
N.
, &
Pavitt
,
S. H.
(
2017
).
Evaluating the impact of trigeminal neuralgia
.
Pain
,
158
(
6
),
1166
1174
. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000853
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For a full description of the license, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.