Comparison of short-latency trigeminal evoked potentials elicited by painful dental and gingival stimulation.
Painful stimulation of tooth pulp and of the maxillary gingiva was undertaken in 16 volunteers. Short-latency evoked potentials (15-50 msec) were recorded over 800 trials in each case at F3-P3 of F4-P4, and the resultant averaged wave forms were compared. The gingival wave was distinct in all subjects and could be averaged across subjects while the dental waves were either noise or very inconsistent over subjects. Averaging of the dental wave forms across subjects yielded an uninterpretable result. It was clear that dental evoked potentials could not be recorded at the sites. These findings could be explained by either or both of two hypotheses: dental afferents are predominantly small fiber, nociceptive end organs that conduct more slowly than soft tissue afferents whereas gingival stimulation activates both large and small fiber populations; and dental representation in somatosensory cortex is different and phylogenetically more primitive than that of neighboring soft tissue. Therefore, the location of the generator sites in cortex and the orientation of the dipole may be different for dental than for gingival wave forms.
Chapman
C R
CR
Gerlach
R
R
Jacobson
R
R
Buffington
V
V
Kaufmann
E
E
D000328:Adult; D004558:Electric Stimulation; D005071:Evoked Potentials; D005260:Female; D005881:Gingiva / Q000502:physiology*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010146:Pain; D011930:Reaction Time; D014070:Tooth / Q000502:physiology*; D014276:Trigeminal Nerve / Q000502:physiology*