Early Outcomes in Targeted Muscle Reinnervation for Traumatic Amputations

S. Denton, Conor McBride, Alexander P. Hammond, Anthony J LoGiudice
{"title":"Early Outcomes in Targeted Muscle Reinnervation for Traumatic Amputations","authors":"S. Denton, Conor McBride, Alexander P. Hammond, Anthony J LoGiudice","doi":"10.1055/a-2086-5446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background  Traumatic amputees commonly experience residual limb pain (RLP) and phantom limb pain (PLP) which present major barriers to rehabilitation. An evolving treatment, targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR), shows promise in reducing these symptoms. While initial data are encouraging, existing studies are low power, and more research is needed to assess the long-term outcomes of TMR. We present the results of self-reported outcome surveys distributed to major-limb amputees more than 1 year post-TMR which were compared with similar data from a landmark randomized control trial for context. Methods  Data was obtained from 17 adult traumatic amputees who were more than 1 year post-TMR using a numerical rating scale and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System survey tool. Results were compared with a 2019 randomized control trial by Dumanian et al which assessed TMR versus standard care (SC) after major limb amputation and demonstrated improvement in pain scores 1 year post-TMR. Results  There was a statistically significant reduction in this cohort of TMR amputees' RLP worst pain scores relative to the comparison study's SC amputees (without TMR). In general, there was no significant difference in outcomes between TMR cohorts. However, PLP worst pain was significantly higher in this cohort relative to the comparison study's TMR group. Conclusion  These findings support the use of TMR for reducing RLP in traumatic amputees. Relative to a similar group treated without TMR in the comparison study, this cohort's RLP was significantly improved. Future studies should aim to recruit more amputees to allow for analysis of functional outcomes, especially in upper limb amputees.","PeriodicalId":34024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery Open","volume":"08 1","pages":"e54 - e59"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2086-5446","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background  Traumatic amputees commonly experience residual limb pain (RLP) and phantom limb pain (PLP) which present major barriers to rehabilitation. An evolving treatment, targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR), shows promise in reducing these symptoms. While initial data are encouraging, existing studies are low power, and more research is needed to assess the long-term outcomes of TMR. We present the results of self-reported outcome surveys distributed to major-limb amputees more than 1 year post-TMR which were compared with similar data from a landmark randomized control trial for context. Methods  Data was obtained from 17 adult traumatic amputees who were more than 1 year post-TMR using a numerical rating scale and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System survey tool. Results were compared with a 2019 randomized control trial by Dumanian et al which assessed TMR versus standard care (SC) after major limb amputation and demonstrated improvement in pain scores 1 year post-TMR. Results  There was a statistically significant reduction in this cohort of TMR amputees' RLP worst pain scores relative to the comparison study's SC amputees (without TMR). In general, there was no significant difference in outcomes between TMR cohorts. However, PLP worst pain was significantly higher in this cohort relative to the comparison study's TMR group. Conclusion  These findings support the use of TMR for reducing RLP in traumatic amputees. Relative to a similar group treated without TMR in the comparison study, this cohort's RLP was significantly improved. Future studies should aim to recruit more amputees to allow for analysis of functional outcomes, especially in upper limb amputees.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外伤性截肢定向肌肉神经移植的早期疗效
背景外伤性截肢者普遍存在残肢痛(RLP)和幻肢痛(PLP),这是康复的主要障碍。一种不断发展的治疗方法——靶向肌肉神经移植(TMR)有望减轻这些症状。虽然最初的数据令人鼓舞,但现有的研究效力较低,需要更多的研究来评估TMR的长期结果。我们介绍了在tmr后超过1年的截肢者的自我报告结果调查结果,并将其与一项具有里程碑意义的随机对照试验的类似数据进行了比较。方法采用数字评定量表和患者报告结果测量信息系统调查工具,对17例tmr术后1年以上的成人创伤性截肢患者进行数据收集。结果与Dumanian等人在2019年进行的一项随机对照试验进行了比较,该试验评估了TMR与标准护理(SC)在主要肢体截肢后的效果,并显示TMR后1年疼痛评分有所改善。结果与对照组相比,TMR截肢者RLP最严重疼痛评分有统计学意义上的显著降低。总的来说,TMR队列之间的结果没有显著差异。然而,与比较研究的TMR组相比,该队列中PLP最严重疼痛明显更高。结论TMR可有效降低外伤性截肢患者的RLP。与比较研究中未接受TMR治疗的类似组相比,该队列的RLP显著提高。未来的研究应旨在招募更多的截肢者,以便分析功能结果,特别是上肢截肢者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Synchronous Abdominal Wall and Small Bowel Transplantation: Critical Insights at Four Year Follow Up Stable Arterial Perforators Mapping in Lower Leg Using Color-coded Doppler Sonography, Acoustic Doppler and Thermal Imaging Camera in Patients Undergoing Digital Subtraction Arteriography Conventional and Robot-Assisted Microvascular Anastomosis - Systematic Review Neo-Forearm Functional Reconstruction after Temporary Ectopic Hand Implantation for Salvage of Hand after Extensive Crush Injury to Forearm Combined Application of a Novel Robotic System and Exoscope for Microsurgical Anastomoses: Preclinical Performance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1