-
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Sep 2023We previously reported that a 6-day continuous peripheral nerve block reduces established postamputation phantom pain. To provide patients and providers with the... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Patient-centered results from a multicenter study of continuous peripheral nerve blocks and postamputation phantom and residual limb pain: secondary outcomes from a randomized, clinical trial.
INTRODUCTION
We previously reported that a 6-day continuous peripheral nerve block reduces established postamputation phantom pain. To provide patients and providers with the information to best inform treatment decisions, here we reanalyze the data and present the results in a more patient-centered format. We also provide information on patient-defined clinically relevant benefits to facilitate evaluation of available studies and guide future trial design.
METHODS
The original trial enrolled participants with a limb amputation and phantom pain who were randomized to receive a 6-day continuous peripheral nerve block(s) of either ropivacaine (n=71) or saline (n=73) in a double-masked fashion. Here we calculate the percentage of each treatment group that experienced a clinically relevant improvement as defined by previous studies as well as present what the participants of our study defined as small, medium, and large analgesic improvements using the 7-point ordinal Patient Global Impression of Change scale.
RESULTS
Among patients who were given a 6-day ropivacaine infusion, 57% experienced at least a 2-point improvement on the 11-point numeric rating scale in their average and worst phantom pain 4 weeks postbaseline as compared with 26% (p<0.001) for average and 25% (p<0.001) for worst pain in patients given a placebo infusion. At 4 weeks, the percentage of participants rating their pain as improved was 53% for the active vs 30% for the placebo groups (95% CI 1.7 (1.1, 2.7), p0.008). For all patients combined, the median (IQR) phantom pain Numeric Rating Scale improvements at 4 weeks considered small, medium, and large were 2 (0-2), 3 (2-5), and 5 (3-7), respectively. The median improvements in the Brief Pain Inventory interference subscale (0-70) associated with small, medium, and large analgesic changes were 8 (1-18), 22 (14-31), and 39 (26-47).
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with postamputation phantom pain, a continuous peripheral nerve block more than doubles the chance of a clinically relevant improvement in pain intensity. Amputees with phantom and/or residual limb pain rate analgesic improvements as clinically relevant similarly to other chronic pain etiologies, although their smallest relevant improvement in the Brief Pain Inventory was significantly larger than previously published values.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
NCT01824082.
Topics: Humans; Phantom Limb; Ropivacaine; Pain, Postoperative; Peripheral Nerves; Patient-Centered Care
PubMed: 36894197
DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2023-104389 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2015This is the first update of a Cochrane review published in Issue 5, 2010 on transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This is the first update of a Cochrane review published in Issue 5, 2010 on transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults. Pain may present in a body part that has been amputated (phantom pain) or at the site of amputation (stump pain), or both. Phantom pain and stump pain are complex and multidimensional and the underlying pathophysiology remains unclear. The condition remains a severe burden for those who are affected by it. The mainstay treatments are predominately pharmacological, with increasing acknowledgement of the need for non-drug interventions. TENS has been recommended as a treatment option but there has been no systematic review of available evidence. Hence, the effectiveness of TENS for phantom pain and stump pain is currently unknown.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the analgesic effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain following amputation in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
For the original version of the review we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, PEDRO and SPORTDiscus (February 2010). For this update, we searched the same databases for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from 2010 to 25 March 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We only included RCTs investigating the use of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain following an amputation in adults.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We planned that where available and appropriate, data from outcome measures were to be pooled and presented as an overall estimate of the effectiveness of TENS.
MAIN RESULTS
In the original review there were no RCTs that examined the effectiveness of TENS for the treatment of phantom pain and stump pain in adults. For this update, we did not identify any additional RCTs for inclusion.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There were no RCTs to judge the effectiveness of TENS for the management of phantom pain and stump pain. The published literature on TENS for phantom pain and stump pain lacks the methodological rigour and robust reporting needed to confidently assess its effectiveness. Further RCT evidence is required before an assessment can be made. Since publication of the original version of this review, we have found no new studies and our conclusions remain unchanged.
Topics: Adult; Amputation Stumps; Humans; Pain Management; Phantom Limb; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation
PubMed: 26284511
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007264.pub3 -
Anesthesiology Jan 2023Postamputation phantom pain is notoriously persistent with few validated treatments. Cryoneurolysis involves the application of low temperatures to reversibly ablate... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Postamputation phantom pain is notoriously persistent with few validated treatments. Cryoneurolysis involves the application of low temperatures to reversibly ablate peripheral nerves. The authors tested the hypothesis that a single cryoneurolysis treatment would decrease phantom pain 4 months later.
METHODS
The authors enrolled patients with a lower-limb amputation and established phantom pain. Each received a single-injection femoral and sciatic nerve block with lidocaine and was subsequently randomized to receive either ultrasound-guided percutaneous cryoneurolysis or sham treatment at these same locations. The primary outcome was the change in average phantom pain intensity between baseline and 4 months as measured with a numeric rating scale (0 to 10), after which an optional crossover treatment was offered. Investigators, participants, and clinical staff were masked to treatment group assignment with the exception of the treating physician performing the cryoneurolysis, who had no subsequent participant interaction.
RESULTS
Pretreatment phantom pain scores were similar in both groups, with a median [quartiles] of 5.0 [4.0, 6.0] for active treatment and 5.0 [4.0, 7.0] for sham. After 4 months, pain intensity decreased by 0.5 [-0.5, 3.0] in patients given cryoneurolysis (n = 71) versus 0 [0, 3] in patients given sham (n = 73), with an estimated difference (95% CI) of -0.1 (-1.0 to 0.7), P = 0.759. Following their statistical gatekeeping protocol, the authors did not make inferences or draw conclusions on secondary endpoints. One serious adverse event occurred after a protocol deviation in which a femoral nerve cryolesion was induced just below the inguinal ligament-instead of the sensory-only saphenous nerve-which resulted in quadriceps weakness, and possibly a fall and clavicle fracture.
CONCLUSIONS
Percutaneous cryoneurolysis did not decrease chronic lower extremity phantom limb pain 4 months after treatment. However, these results were based upon the authors' specific study protocol, and since the optimal cryoneurolysis treatment parameters such as freeze duration and anatomic treatment location remain unknown, further research is warranted.
Topics: Humans; Phantom Limb; Cold Temperature; Lidocaine; Nerve Block; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 36512721
DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000004429 -
British Medical Journal Dec 1978
Topics: Central Nervous System; Humans; Pain, Postoperative; Peripheral Nerves; Phantom Limb
PubMed: 728735
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Feb 1999This study presents a review of the literature on the attributes and potential mechanisms involved in phantom limb pain, encompassing studies describing pain in the... (Review)
Review
This study presents a review of the literature on the attributes and potential mechanisms involved in phantom limb pain, encompassing studies describing pain in the residual limb, phantom sensation and phantom limb pain, and the difficulties that may arise when making these distinctions. A variety of theories have been proposed to explain causal mechanisms for phantom limb pain. Conceptually, research into phantom limb pain is informed by the particular theory of chronic pain that is dominant at the time the research is undertaken. For example, early physiological theories on the etiology of phantom limb pain were grounded in specificity or pattern theories of pain. Later physiological research was based on the framework provided by Gate Control Theory and focused on identifying peripheral, spinal, and central neural mechanisms. Psychological explanations were grounded in psychoanalytic or personality theories of chronic pain which propose that phantom limb pain results from pre-amputation psychological disturbance. Despite numerous studies examining phantom limb pain, much of this research has both conceptual and methodological shortcomings. As such, the application of these research findings to clinical practice has limited utility.
Topics: Amputation Stumps; Humans; Pain; Pain Measurement; Phantom Limb
PubMed: 10069153
DOI: 10.1016/s0885-3924(98)00136-5 -
Brain and Behavior Mar 2022Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a complicated condition with diverse clinical challenges. It consists of pain perception of a previously amputated limb. The exact pain... (Review)
Review
Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a complicated condition with diverse clinical challenges. It consists of pain perception of a previously amputated limb. The exact pain mechanism is disputed and includes mechanisms involving cerebral, peripheral, and spinal origins. Such controversy limits researchers' and clinicians' ability to develop consistent therapeutics or management. Neuroimaging is an essential tool that can address this problem. This review explores diffusion tensor imaging, functional magnetic resonance imaging, electroencephalography, and magnetoencephalography in the context of PLP. These imaging modalities have distinct mechanisms, implications, applications, and limitations. Diffusion tensor imaging can outline structural changes and has surgical applications. Functional magnetic resonance imaging captures functional changes with spatial resolution and has therapeutic applications. Electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography can identify functional changes with a strong temporal resolution. Each imaging technique provides a unique perspective and they can be used in concert to reveal the true nature of PLP. Furthermore, researchers can utilize the respective strengths of each neuroimaging technique to support the development of innovative therapies. PLP exemplifies how neuroimaging and clinical management are intricately connected. This review can assist clinicians and researchers seeking a foundation for applications and understanding the limitations of neuroimaging techniques in the context of PLP.
Topics: Amputees; Brain Mapping; Diffusion Tensor Imaging; Humans; Neuroimaging; Phantom Limb
PubMed: 35218308
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2509 -
Health Technology Assessment... Nov 2018Although many treatments exist for phantom limb pain (PLP), the evidence supporting them is limited and there are no guidelines for PLP management. Brain and spinal cord...
BACKGROUND
Although many treatments exist for phantom limb pain (PLP), the evidence supporting them is limited and there are no guidelines for PLP management. Brain and spinal cord neurostimulation therapies are targeted at patients with chronic PLP but have yet to be systematically reviewed.
OBJECTIVE
To determine which types of brain and spinal stimulation therapy appear to be the best for treating chronic PLP.
DESIGN
Systematic reviews of effectiveness and epidemiology studies, and a survey of NHS practice.
POPULATION
All patients with PLP.
INTERVENTIONS
Invasive interventions - deep brain stimulation (DBS), motor cortex stimulation (MCS), spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation. Non-invasive interventions - repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Phantom limb pain and quality of life.
DATA SOURCES
Twelve databases (including MEDLINE and EMBASE) and clinical trial registries were searched in May 2017, with no date limits applied.
REVIEW METHODS
Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full texts. Data extraction and quality assessments were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by another. A questionnaire was distributed to clinicians via established e-mail lists of two relevant clinical societies. All results were presented narratively with accompanying tables.
RESULTS
Seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 30 non-comparative group studies, 18 case reports and 21 epidemiology studies were included. Results from a good-quality RCT suggested short-term benefits of rTMS in reducing PLP, but not in reducing anxiety or depression. Small randomised trials of tDCS suggested the possibility of modest, short-term reductions in PLP. No RCTs of invasive therapies were identified. Results from small, non-comparative group studies suggested that, although many patients benefited from short-term pain reduction, far fewer maintained their benefits. Most studies had important methodological or reporting limitations and few studies reported quality-of-life data. The evidence on prognostic factors for the development of chronic PLP from the longitudinal studies also had important limitations. The results from these studies suggested that pre-amputation pain and early PLP intensity are good predictors of chronic PLP. Results from the cross-sectional studies suggested that the proportion of patients with severe chronic PLP is between around 30% and 40% of the chronic PLP population, and that around one-quarter of chronic PLP patients find their PLP to be either moderately or severely limiting or bothersome. There were 37 responses to the questionnaire distributed to clinicians. SCS and DRG stimulation are frequently used in the NHS but the prevalence of use of DBS and MCS was low. Most responders considered SCS and DRG stimulation to be at least sometimes effective. Neurosurgeons had mixed views on DBS, but most considered MCS to rarely be effective. Most clinicians thought that a randomised trial design could be successfully used to study neurostimulation therapies.
LIMITATION
There was a lack of robust research studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Currently available studies of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of neurostimulation treatments do not provide robust, reliable results. Therefore, it is uncertain which treatments are best for chronic PLP.
FUTURE WORK
Randomised crossover trials, randomised N-of-1 trials and prospective registry trials are viable study designs for future research.
STUDY REGISTRATION
The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017065387.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Deep Brain Stimulation; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Humans; Pain Management; Phantom Limb; Quality of Life; Spinal Cord Stimulation; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
PubMed: 30407905
DOI: 10.3310/hta22620 -
Iranian Journal of Child Neurology 2016To determine the frequency of phantom limb sensation (PLS) and phantom limb pain (PLP) in children and young adults suffering landmine-related amputation.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the frequency of phantom limb sensation (PLS) and phantom limb pain (PLP) in children and young adults suffering landmine-related amputation.
MATERIALS & METHODS
All youths with amputation due to landmine explosions participated in this study. The proportions of patients with phantom limb sensation/pain, intensity and frequency of pain were reported. Chi square test was used to examine the relationship between variables. Comparison of PLP and PLS between upper and lower amputation was done by unpaired t-test.
RESULTS
There were 38 male and 3 female with the mean age of 15.8±2.4yr. The mean interval between injury and follow-up was 90.7±39.6 months. Twelve (44.4%) upper limb amputees and 11 (26.8%) lower limb amputees had PLS. Nine (33.3%) upper limb amputees and 7 (17.1%) lower limb amputees experienced PLP. Of 27 upper limb amputees, 6 (14.6%) and among 15 lower limb amputees, 6 (14.6%) had both PLS and PLP. One case suffered amputation of upper and lower limbs and was experiencing PLS and PLP in both parts. PLS had a significant difference between the upper and lower amputated groups. Significant relationship was observed between age of casualty and duration of injury with PLP.
CONCLUSION
Phantom limb sensation and pain in young survivors of landmine explosions appear to be common, even years after amputation.
PubMed: 27375755
DOI: No ID Found -
The Journal of Pain Mar 2022The experience of phantom limb pain (PLP) is a common consequence of limb amputation, resulting in severe impairments of the affected person. Previous studies have shown...
The experience of phantom limb pain (PLP) is a common consequence of limb amputation, resulting in severe impairments of the affected person. Previous studies have shown that several factors such as age at or site of amputation are associated with the emergence and maintenance of PLP. In this cross-sectional study we assessed the presence of several phantom phenomena including PLP and other amputation-related information in a sample of 3,374 unilateral upper and lower limb amputees. Clinical and demographic variables (age at amputation, level of amputation) explained 10.6% of the variance in PLP and perceptual variables (intensity of phantom limb sensation [PLS], referred sensations, intensity of telescoping, residual limb pain [RLP] intensity) explained 16.9% of the variance. These variables were specific for PLP and not for RLP. These results suggest that distinct variables are associated with PLP (age at amputation, level of amputation, PLS intensity, referred sensations, intensity of telescoping, RLP intensity) and RLP (PLP intensity) and point at partly different mechanisms for the emergence and maintenance of PLP and RLP. PERSPECTIVE: Clinical/demographic variables as well as perceptual variables are 2 major components related to PLP and explain ∼11% and ∼17% of the variance. These results could potentially help clinicians to understand which factors may contribute to chronic phantom limb pain.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Amputees; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Phantom Limb; Prevalence
PubMed: 34583023
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2021.09.003 -
BMC Neurology Feb 2024We previously performed a systematic review and meta-analysis which revealed a Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) prevalence estimate of 64% [95% CI: 60.01-68.1]. The prevalence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
We previously performed a systematic review and meta-analysis which revealed a Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) prevalence estimate of 64% [95% CI: 60.01-68.1]. The prevalence estimates varied significantly between developed and developing countries. Remarkably, there is limited evidence on the prevalence of PLP and associated risk factors in African populations.
METHODS
Adults who had undergone limb amputations between January 2018 and October 2022 were recruited from healthcare facilities in the Western and Eastern Cape Provinces. We excluded individuals with auditory or speech impairments that hindered clear communication via telephone. Data on the prevalence and risk factors for PLP were collected telephonically from consenting and eligible participants. The prevalence of PLP was expressed as a percentage with a 95% confidence interval. The associations between PLP and risk factors for PLP were tested using univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses. The strength of association was calculated using the Odds Ratio where association was confirmed.
RESULTS
The overall PLP prevalence was 71.73% [95% CI: 65.45-77.46]. Persistent pre-operative pain, residual limb pain, and non-painful phantom limb sensations were identified as risk factors for PLP.
CONCLUSION
This study revealed a high prevalence of PLP. The use of effective treatments targeting pre-amputation pain may yield more effective and targeted pre-amputation care, leading to improved quality of life after amputation.
Topics: Humans; Cross-Sectional Studies; Phantom Limb; Prevalence; Quality of Life; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38321380
DOI: 10.1186/s12883-024-03547-w