このページは自動翻訳されたものであり、翻訳の正確性は保証されていません。を参照してください。 英語版 ソーステキスト用。

Results of Nerve Surgery to Treat PostAmputation Pain (TreatPAP)

2026年5月18日 更新者:jlgroen、Leiden University Medical Center

Results of Nerve Surgery to Treat PostAmputation Pain (TreatPAP): a Prospective Study

Rationale: Postamputation pain (PAP) is frequently seen after amputations and is a severe lifelong disabling condition affecting quality of life (QoL). Different nerve surgical techniques are available to treat PAP if non-surgical treatment options are not sufficient. Multiple techniques have been described for treatment of symptomatic neuromas with varying results. Techniques described include traction neurectomy with/without implantation, nerve grafting, nerve capping, regenerative peripheral nerve interface, and targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR). In the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), the most common techniques to treat painful neuromas include TMR and fascicular split (FS). TMR involves coaptating the transected mixed nerve to functional motor nerves, showing promising results in recent studies. FS is a technique closely related to neurectomy with implantation in a functional muscle. The difference is that with FS, the nerve is split into fascicles before implantation to allow for better distribution of nerve fibers. These techniques have not yet been compared. In this study, the investigators will compare both these techniques in a prospective setting for the treatment of PAP. The hypothesis is, that after 12 months, pain will be diminished and QoL will be increased in all patients versus the pre-operative status. There will be little to no difference in outcome between the surgical techniques used.

Objective: To evaluate limb pain in patients with intractable postamputation pain (residual limb pain and phantom limb pain) one year after nerve embedding surgery following the standardized workup of the LUMC.

Study design: Prospective study Study population: Patients 18 years of age or older, with a history of more than 6 months of intractable postamputation neuropathic limb pain, with no history of previous surgical intervention for pain treatment, referred to the Leiden Nerve Center.

Main study parameters/endpoints: The mean difference in pain scores for phantom limb pain and residual limb pain one year postoperatively. An average pain score from the past 7 days is used for PLP and RLP individually, on the 11-point (0-10) numerical rating scale (NRS). Additionally, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Behavior and Interference Questionnaire Short Forms (7a and 8a, respectively) are used one year postoperatively.

Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit, and group relatedness: Both techniques are currently used in the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) and considered standard of care. The decision to perform either technique is solely dependent on the personal preference of the treating nerve surgeon. The results of this trial will improve the understanding of the treatment effect of both surgical techniques with a minimal patient burden. Participation requires patients to complete 3-4 non-invasive questionnaires about pain, quality of life, depression and anxiety, and mobility over a period of 2 years. The pre-operative (if applicable) and 12-month postoperative questionnaire will each take approximately 15 minutes to complete. The other two questionnaires at 18 and 24 months postoperative will take approximately 3-4 minutes to complete. Additionally, participants will fill out a daily questionnaire consisting of one to three questions about pain for 7 consecutive days at 12 months.

調査の概要

詳細な説明

Postamputation pain (PAP) is a common sequela after major lower limb amputation, with an estimated incidence of 61%. PAP can be divided into two major categories: phantom limb pain (PLP) and residual limb pain (RLP, 'stump pain'). Both RLP and PLP are predominantly driven by the cut nerve endings during the amputation, that form terminal-neuromas. PAP is known to compromise prosthetic rehabilitation and profoundly diminishes the quality of life after amputation. When PAP develops, it is extremely difficult to treat. When non-surgical treatment fails, or side effects of medication dominate patients' lives, surgery for PAP is occasionally undertaken. Nerve surgical techniques that are then applied differ widely and lack any solid scientific base. In general, secondary surgery for PAP includes resection of the neuroma and transposition of the freshened nerve into a more favorable environment, such as muscle, bone, vessels, or fat. This nerve implantation technique has been described since 1918 to treat painful neuromas, showing good results ranging from 64 to 82% of pain relief. Based on the vast experience gained over a 25-year period in the Leiden Nerve Center in treating painful neuromas, an adaptation of the nerve implantation method was developed called the Fascicular Split (FS) technique to treat PAP. In the FS technique, after transecting the neuroma, the nerve is first split into multiple fascicles before implanting the nerve in the muscle. This allows for better distribution of the nerve in the muscle, resulting in less neuroma formation. The strength of FS is its relative simplicity, which is crucial for the wider implementation in routine care. Promising results were observed applying this technique in a small series (n=8) of patients with PAP yielding a long-lasting, life-changing effect in all but one patient. In some cases, FS was performed years after the initial amputation and after previous failed neuroma surgeries. Other nerve handling techniques to treat symptomatic neuroma include centro-central neurorrhaphy, End-to-Side neurorrhaphy, Graft to Nowhere, Targeted Muscle Reinnervation (TMR), and Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interface. TMR is, after simply embedding the nerve in healthy tissue, the best studied and most promising technique to treat PAP. Several cohort studies and a recent randomized trial in secondary surgery for PAP show that a nerve surgical technique called Targeted Muscle Reinnervation (TMR) is effective in treating PAP. However, the main disadvantage of TMR is that it is a time-consuming procedure.

To date, there are no studies that compare both techniques for the treatment of PAP. The investigators believe that the treatment FS yields similar results to TMR. Moreover, in terms of clinical applicability, the FS technique is easier to learn, does not require extensive nerve surgical skills, and does not take much time to perform.

Few papers have been published on TMR as a treatment for postamputation pain. Despite issues with the validity of the articles, results of PLP and RLP were consistently in favor of TMR as a technique regarding all outcome measures, including intensity and interference with daily activities. FS, although not mentioned in the literature, has many similarities with nerve implantation, which showed similarly good results for the treatment of painful neuromas. However, there have been no studies to date that directly compare the two techniques.

PAP is a lifelong disabling condition profoundly affecting quality of life. Nerve embedding surgical techniques (simple, FS, and TMR) have proven to be effective to treat postamputation pain. Preliminary results show that simple embedding, TMR, and FS are potentially good techniques to treat invalidating PAP. However, no comparative studies have been performed.

The investigators hypothesize that FS will show equally good results compared to TMR in the surgical treatment of intractable PAP, reducing pain, and improving quality-of-life (QoL) and mobility.

The investigators propose a prospective observational cohort study evaluating outcomes after various nerve embedding techniques following a standardized selection protocol in patients with intractable post-amputation pain after a major limb amputation.

研究の種類

観察的

入学 (推定)

98

連絡先と場所

このセクションには、調査を実施する担当者の連絡先の詳細と、この調査が実施されている場所に関する情報が記載されています。

研究連絡先

研究場所

    • South Holland
      • Leiden、South Holland、オランダ、2333 ZA
        • 募集
        • Leiden University Medical Center

参加基準

研究者は、適格基準と呼ばれる特定の説明に適合する人を探します。これらの基準のいくつかの例は、人の一般的な健康状態または以前の治療です。

適格基準

就学可能な年齢

  • 大人
  • 高齢者

健康ボランティアの受け入れ

いいえ

サンプリング方法

非確率サンプル

調査対象母集団

Patients with intractable postamputation pain after a major extremity amputation (trans humeral, elbow disarticulation, forearm, transfemoral, knee disarticulation, and transtibial) undergoing surgical postamputation pain treatment in our center.

説明

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age older than or equal to 18 years
  • Intractable postamputation pain

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Cognitive impairment or delirium at the time of inclusion
  • Having received previous radiotherapy on the affected limb
  • Patients who are unable to comprehend the informed consent form or the questionnaires used in the current study
  • Unfit for general anesthesia

研究計画

このセクションでは、研究がどのように設計され、研究が何を測定しているかなど、研究計画の詳細を提供します。

研究はどのように設計されていますか?

デザインの詳細

コホートと介入

グループ/コホート
介入・治療
Control: Targeted Muscle Reinnervation (TMR)
Patients with a symptomatic neuroma requiring surgical intervention

Targeted Muscle Reinnervation surgical technique

  1. Painful nerve is identified and the neuroma is resected.
  2. A nerve stimulator is used to identify functional motor nerve branches. Near the point where the motor branch enters the muscle, the motor nerve branch is transected
  3. End-to-end nerve coaptation is performed between the amputated nerve and the transected motor nerve branch.
Intervention: Fascicular split
Patients with a symptomatic neuroma requiring surgical intervention

Fasicular split surgical technique:

  1. Painful nerve is identified and the neuroma is resected.
  2. Split the nerve into its constituent multiple nerve fascicles
  3. Create a deep muscle pocket for each individual fascicle
  4. Plant each fascicle into a separate muscle compartment and fixate the fascicle in place with tissue glue.
他の名前:
  • nerve embedding

この研究は何を測定していますか?

主要な結果の測定

結果測定
メジャーの説明
時間枠
Phantom limb pain measured on the 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale.
時間枠:1 year postoperatively
A primary endpoint is the mean phantom limb pain experience one year postoperatively. This will be measured on the 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale over 7 consecutive days. A higher score indicates worse pain.
1 year postoperatively
Residual limb pain measured on the 11-point numeric rating scale
時間枠:1 year postoperatively
A primary endpoint is the mean residual limb pain experience one year postoperatively. This will be measured on the 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale over 7 consecutive days. A higher score indicates worse pain.
1 year postoperatively
PROMIS pain behavior short form 7a
時間枠:1 year postoperatively
PROMIS pain behavior short form 7a in Dutch-Flemish
1 year postoperatively
PROMIS pain interference short form 8a
時間枠:1 year postoperatively
PROMIS pain interference short form 8a in Dutch-Flemish
1 year postoperatively

二次結果の測定

結果測定
メジャーの説明
時間枠
Phantom limb pain using the 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale
時間枠:From enrolment until 24 months post-operatively
From enrolment until 24 months post-operatively
Residual limb pain using the 11-point (0-10) numeric rating scale
時間枠:From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
PROMIS pain behavior 7a short form in Dutch-Flemish
時間枠:From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
PROMIS pain interference 8a short form in Dutch-Flemish
時間枠:From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
Quality of life (EQ-5D-5L)
時間枠:From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 24 months postoperatively
Pain type using the ICAN localization map
時間枠:From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
Neuropathic pain using the PainDetect
時間枠:From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
Hospital anxiety and depression using the HADS
時間枠:From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
Perceived treatment effect using the GPE-DV
時間枠:at 12 months postoperativley
at 12 months postoperativley
Prosthetic rehabilitation using the PLUS-M
時間枠:From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
From enrolment until 12 months postoperatively
Changes in sensory quality in the amputated stump using quantitative sensory testing (QST)
時間枠:at enrolment until 12 months postoperative
at enrolment until 12 months postoperative
Quantified neuroma perfusion using near-infrared fluorescence using indocyanine green
時間枠:Peri-operatively
Patients will receive near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) during the surgery. ICG is a fluorescent dye that binds to plasma proteins and emits light when excited by near-infrared wavelengths. After intravenous injection, the dye circulates rapidly, allowing surgeons to assess blood flow to tissue of interest. This method has very good safety profile and has been used extensively in gastro-intestinal, reconstructive, vascular and neurosurgery. This study aims to use quantified ICG NIR fluorescence imaging to evaluate perfusion patterns of symptomatic and asymptomatic neuromas after amputation.
Peri-operatively
Surgery duration
時間枠:Perioperatively
in minutes
Perioperatively
Length of hospital stay
時間枠:From the date of surgery to the date of discharge from the hospital, up to 1 year post surgery
Amount of days patients spent in hospital post surgery
From the date of surgery to the date of discharge from the hospital, up to 1 year post surgery
Adverse events
時間枠:until 30 days postoperatively
i.e., infection, rebleed, with Clavien-Dindo scores
until 30 days postoperatively
Medication Quantification Scale
時間枠:until 24 months postoperatively
Phantom limb pain, residual limb pain, the PROMIS pain behavior 7a short form, and the PROMIS interference 8a short form will be corrected for pain medication use, using the medication quantification scale. A higher score indicates more pain medication use.
until 24 months postoperatively

協力者と研究者

ここでは、この調査に関係する人々や組織を見つけることができます。

捜査官

  • 主任研究者:Justus L. Groen, MD, PhD、Leiden University Medical Center

出版物と役立つリンク

研究に関する情報を入力する責任者は、自発的にこれらの出版物を提供します。これらは、研究に関連するあらゆるものに関するものである可能性があります。

一般刊行物

研究記録日

これらの日付は、ClinicalTrials.gov への研究記録と要約結果の提出の進捗状況を追跡します。研究記録と報告された結果は、国立医学図書館 (NLM) によって審査され、公開 Web サイトに掲載される前に、特定の品質管理基準を満たしていることが確認されます。

主要日程の研究

研究開始 (実際)

2025年8月14日

一次修了 (推定)

2028年8月20日

研究の完了 (推定)

2029年8月20日

試験登録日

最初に提出

2025年9月15日

QC基準を満たした最初の提出物

2026年5月18日

最初の投稿 (実際)

2026年5月26日

学習記録の更新

投稿された最後の更新 (実際)

2026年5月26日

QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました

2026年5月18日

最終確認日

2026年5月1日

詳しくは

本研究に関する用語

個々の参加者データ (IPD) の計画

個々の参加者データ (IPD) を共有する予定はありますか?

未定

IPD プランの説明

Undecided

医薬品およびデバイス情報、研究文書

米国FDA規制医薬品の研究

いいえ

米国FDA規制機器製品の研究

いいえ

米国で製造され、米国から輸出された製品。

いいえ

この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。

購読する