Sensory Abnormalities in Post-surgical Peripheral Neuropathy
NCT ID: NCT03966677
Last Updated: 2024-02-22
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
162 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2019-07-01
2023-09-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The reference interval is calculated from a large number of healthy subjects sampled across age, anthropometrics, ethnicity, and gender. Normative reference intervals are certainly of help, particularly in the screening of subjects, but may be of limited value in the detailed assessment of pathophysiological processes. Also, increasing the number of analyses in a subject expands the risk of making a type I error (acquiring "false" positive results). The likelihood of one or more type I errors in the analysis of 10 different laboratory values in one subject is impressive 46% (\[1 - 0.95\^10\] =0.46). It is well-known that multiple measurements are commonly performed in medical practice and research, but corrected significance levels are not always used.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Chronic Neuropathic Pain After Nerve Repair Hand Surgery
NCT03174665
Polyneuropathy in Diabetes Mellitus Type 2
NCT02947828
Validation Study of Neuropathic Pain
NCT00623961
Diabetes Peripheral Neuropathy and Small-fibre Nerve Damage: A Comparative Study
NCT01160887
Resistance Training in Patients With Diabetic Neuropathy
NCT03252132
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
However, other alternatives exist that, hypothetically, might provide improved diagnostic specificity and sensitivity. First, in unilateral sensory deficits (mono-neuropathies), assessments at the contralateral side are possible, allowing a comparison with the pathological side (relative approach). The within-subject variances (WSV) are often significantly smaller than the between-subject variances (BSV) in QST assessments. In a normative study including thermal assessments (n = 100), the WSV and the BSV ranged between 18-23% and 77-82% of the total variance, respectively. Correspondingly, in a study of individuals with post-thoracotomy pain syndrome, the estimated WSV and BSV were 5-28% and 72-95%, respectively. Thus, scenarios using the subject as their own control may reduce data variability and improve diagnostic efficacy. However, the use of a contralateral homologous area as a control area in sensory testing has been questioned by several authors. The occurrence of mirror image sensory dysfunction (MISD) may affect contralateral assessments, requiring a distant control area. Second, instead of using healthy controls in pain studies, the use of post-surgical pain-free individuals as controls (e.g. post-groin hernia repair, post-thoracotomy) has been recommended in chronic post-surgical pain studies.
In spite of the importance of selecting an optimally controlled research design, the research group is only aware of one QST study addressing the control-group problem, i.e., a study including individuals with complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS I) restricted to one extremity. The study examined the validity of using the contralateral side as a control compared to using normative data from healthy individuals. The study recommended that the contralateral side in CPRS I individuals should be used as a control (relative approach).
Thus, it may be inferred that the following approaches are available for evaluating sensory data from an anticipated pathological site: an empirical approach (á priori set reference values), an absolute approach (comparing the subject's pathological side with normative data), and a relative approach (comparing the subject's side-to-side differences with normative data).
The present study has a prospective, observational, three-cohort design comparing somatosensory profiles from a cohort with groin hernia repair (GHR) associated CPSP (P-GHR; n = 70) across two standard cohorts: one surgical cohort without CPSP (NP-GHR; n = 54) and another healthy non-surgical cohort (NOP; n = 54). Testing sites are the surgical groin, with the comparator sites, the non-surgical groin, and the lower arm. The QST assessments are compared across cohorts (P-GHR, NP-GHR, NOP), testing sides (surgical side, non-surgical side), and testing sites (groins, arm). The statistical processing is by linear mixed-effects models and z-transformations, using the NOP cohort as reference material.
The main objective is:
\* To characterize and interpret the pathophysiologic substrate behind the somatosensory profiles in individuals with GHR-associated CPSP using relevant controls
Other objectives are:
* To examine the somatosensory data repeatability
* To determine the diagnostic efficiency of QST in identifying GHR-associated somatosensory abnormalities
* To compare the somatosensory testing efficacy of the absolute approach compared to the relative approach, using normative healthy controls
* To examine contralateral somatosensory abnormalities in individuals with/without GHR-associated CPSP
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
P-GHR
Patients with persistent severe pain after groin hernia repair.
No interventions assigned to this group
NP-GHR
Patients without pain after groin hernia repair.
No interventions assigned to this group
NP
Healthy non-operated controls
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Age above 18 yrs and below 65 yrs
* Signed informed consent
* Body mass index (BMI): 18 \< BMI \< 35 kg/m\^2
* ASA I-II
In addition, for study subjects without pain after GHR (NP-GHR):
* having undergone uncomplicated, elective, unilateral open GHR a.m. Lichtenstein
* no restriction in ADL-functions due to the GHR
* activity-related groin pain \< 3 (numerical rating scale \[NRS\]: 0 = no pain, 10 = worst imaginable pain)
Exclusion Criteria
* do not speak or understand Danish
* who cannot cooperate with the investigation
* abuse of alcohol or drugs - according to investigator's evaluation
* use of psychotropic drugs (exception of SSRI)
* neurologic or psychiatric disease
* chronic pain condition
* regular use of analgesic drugs
* skin lesions or tattoos in the assessment areas (groins, lower arm)
* nerve lesions in the assessment sites (e.g., after trauma, abdominal surgery)
In addition, for healthy non-operated study subjects (NP):
* subjects, who have had previous surgery in or near the groin region
* use of prescription drugs one week before the trial
* use of over-the-counter (OTC) drugs 48 hours before the trial
* experiencing pain at rest \> 3 (NRS)
* experiencing activity-related pain in or near the groin \> 3 (NRS)
In addition, for study subjects without pain after GHR (NP-GHR):
* experiencing pain at rest \> 3 (NRS)
* experiencing activity-related pain in or near the groin \> 3 (NRS)
18 Years
65 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Copenhagen
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
mads u werner
Principal Investigator
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Multidisciplinary Pain Center 7612, Neuroscience Center, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9
Copenhagen O, , Denmark
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Schug SA, Lavand'homme P, Barke A, Korwisi B, Rief W, Treede RD; IASP Taskforce for the Classification of Chronic Pain. The IASP classification of chronic pain for ICD-11: chronic postsurgical or posttraumatic pain. Pain. 2019 Jan;160(1):45-52. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001413.
Treede RD. The role of quantitative sensory testing in the prediction of chronic pain. Pain. 2019 May;160 Suppl 1:S66-S69. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001544.
Reimer M, Forstenpointner J, Hartmann A, Otto JC, Vollert J, Gierthmuhlen J, Klein T, Hullemann P, Baron R. Sensory bedside testing: a simple stratification approach for sensory phenotyping. Pain Rep. 2020 May 21;5(3):e820. doi: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000000820. eCollection 2020 May-Jun.
Truini A, Aleksovska K, Anderson CC, Attal N, Baron R, Bennett DL, Bouhassira D, Cruccu G, Eisenberg E, Enax-Krumova E, Davis KD, Di Stefano G, Finnerup NB, Garcia-Larrea L, Hanafi I, Haroutounian S, Karlsson P, Rakusa M, Rice ASC, Sachau J, Smith BH, Sommer C, Tolle T, Valls-Sole J, Veluchamy A. Joint European Academy of Neurology-European Pain Federation-Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment. Eur J Neurol. 2023 Aug;30(8):2177-2196. doi: 10.1111/ene.15831. Epub 2023 May 30.
Finnerup NB, Haroutounian S, Kamerman P, Baron R, Bennett DLH, Bouhassira D, Cruccu G, Freeman R, Hansson P, Nurmikko T, Raja SN, Rice ASC, Serra J, Smith BH, Treede RD, Jensen TS. Neuropathic pain: an updated grading system for research and clinical practice. Pain. 2016 Aug;157(8):1599-1606. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000492.
Pfau DB, Krumova EK, Treede RD, Baron R, Toelle T, Birklein F, Eich W, Geber C, Gerhardt A, Weiss T, Magerl W, Maier C. Quantitative sensory testing in the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS): reference data for the trunk and application in patients with chronic postherpetic neuralgia. Pain. 2014 May;155(5):1002-1015. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2014.02.004. Epub 2014 Feb 10.
Magerl W, Krumova EK, Baron R, Tolle T, Treede RD, Maier C. Reference data for quantitative sensory testing (QST): refined stratification for age and a novel method for statistical comparison of group data. Pain. 2010 Dec;151(3):598-605. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.07.026. Epub 2010 Oct 20.
Rolke R, Baron R, Maier C, Tolle TR, Treede -DR, Beyer A, Binder A, Birbaumer N, Birklein F, Botefur IC, Braune S, Flor H, Huge V, Klug R, Landwehrmeyer GB, Magerl W, Maihofner C, Rolko C, Schaub C, Scherens A, Sprenger T, Valet M, Wasserka B. Quantitative sensory testing in the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS): standardized protocol and reference values. Pain. 2006 Aug;123(3):231-243. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.01.041. Epub 2006 May 11.
Kemler MA, Schouten HJ, Gracely RH. Diagnosing sensory abnormalities with either normal values or values from contralateral skin: comparison of two approaches in complex regional pain syndrome I. Anesthesiology. 2000 Sep;93(3):718-27. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200009000-00021.
Rosenberger DC, Pogatzki-Zahn EM. Chronic post-surgical pain - update on incidence, risk factors and preventive treatment options. BJA Educ. 2022 May;22(5):190-196. doi: 10.1016/j.bjae.2021.11.008. Epub 2022 Feb 24. No abstract available.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
H-16034340
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.