Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
8 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-10-27
2023-08-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Focused Ultrasound Treatment of Stump Neuromas for the Relief of Chronic Post-Amputation Neuropathic Pain
NCT03255395
Evaluation of Ultrasonic Neuroma Size With Residual Limb Pain in Above-Knee Amputees
NCT00686764
Effects of Percutaneous Neuromouldation of the Saphenous Nerve in Patients With Patellofemoral Pain
NCT06505382
Cryolesion in Treatment of Phantom Limb Pain
NCT03415360
Does Ultrasound Improve Procedural Time in the Lateral Popliteal Approach to the Sciatic Nerve in Obese Patients
NCT01579747
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Both RLP and PLP fall under the umbrella term "post-amputation pain." While these conditions are frequently found in combination, their clinical features and underlying causes are distinct. PLP is a painful sensation in the distribution of the missing limb. Following amputation, abnormalities at multiple levels of the neural axis have been implicated in the development of PLP; changes include cortical reorganization, reduced inhibitory processes at the spinal cord, synaptic response changes and hyperexcitability at the dorsal root ganglion, and retrograde peripheral nerves shrinkage.
Residual limb pain has been called "neuroma pain" and is mechanistically distinct from PLP11. Neuromas may form as early 6-10 weeks after nerve transection, and are thought the produce ectopic neural discharges resulting in severe pain. Evidence suggests RLP and PLP commonly co-occur and patients may struggle to differentiate between these pain types. Risk factors include female sex, upper extremity amputation, pre-amputation pain, residual pain in contralateral limb, and time since amputation.
Depression, anxiety, and stress are known to exacerbate PLP / RLP. Patients experiencing PLP and RLP also experience a higher incidence of indecisiveness, suicidal ideation, and thoughts of self-harm8. Current guidelines for treatment of PLP and RLP are not standardized. Treatments includes pre-operative analgesia, neuromodulation mirror therapy, imagery, acupuncture, transcranial stimulation, deep brain stimulation, and medications (including, but not limited to: TCAs, SSRIs, gabapentinoids, sodium channel blockers, ketamine, opioids, and NSAIDs). Many agents have been injected in neuromas. These include local anesthetic, phenol, alcohol, and botulinum toxin. These oral, intravenous, and nonpharmacological modalities have demonstrated limited success in the treatment of PLP / RLP. Neuroma cryoablation has been used, but this method of neural destruction poses technical challenges related to cumbersome needle placement and the requirement for time-intensive freeze-thaw cycles.
Conventional RFA has been studied on RLP. Zhang et. al treated 13 patients with painful stump neuromas. The study started with alcohol neurolysis before using ultrasound-guided RFA for refractory cases. The frequency of sharp pain was reduced in all RFA-treated patients. Kim et. al described a case in which ultrasound-guided RFA was successfully used to treat a sciatic neuroma of an above-knee amputee.
No outcome literature on the effectiveness of C-RFA technology has been published. C-RFA is similar in mechanism to conventional RFA: a thermal lesion is created by applying radiofrequency energy through an electrode placed at a target structure. In C-RFA, a constant flow of ambient water is circulated through the electrode via a peristaltic pump, maintaining a lowered tissue temperature by creating a heat sink. By removing heat from tissues immediately adjacent to the electrode tip, a lower lesioning temperature is maintained, resulting in less tissue charring adjacent to the electrode, less tissue impedance and more efficient heating of target tissue. The volume of tissue heated, and the resultant thermal lesion size is substantially larger with C-RFA, conferring an advantage over conventional RFA. Further, given the spherical geometry and forward projection the C-RFA lesions beyond the distal end of the electrode, the RFA probe can be positioned at a range of possible angles and still capture the target neural structure, whereas more fastidious, parallel positioning is required with conventional RFA. These technical advantages increase the probability of successful denervation of neural pain generators that have variability in anatomic location. Additionally, a longer lesion of the RLP-generating nerve may be more reliably achieved with C-RFA compared to conventional RFA.
As such, the present study aims to define the attributable effect of cooled RFA on pain, physical function, and health-related quality of life in patients with post-amputation neuroma-associated residual limb pain. This prospective single-arm pilot study is intended to inform a future properly powered randomized controlled trial.
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.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Residual Limb Pain in affected amputated limb
Patient has residual limb pain in amputated limb and is scheduled to receive standard of care treatment of cooled radiofrequency ablation.
Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation
RFA procedures will be performed with modification accounting for appropriate C-RFA technique. Participant will be positioned prone and skin prepped with chloroprep. Ultrasound probe will be placed on residual limb at a transverse angle in order to view the nerve and associated neuroma in long-axis. The probe will be advanced to the site of the stump neuroma. C-RFA electrode will be placed adjacent to neuroma. Needle will be connected via wire to a cooled radiofrequency generator. Motor and sensory testing will be performed to reproduce or exacerbate the RLP and / or PLP. At the site of the neuroma, 2 mL of local anesthetic will be injected through the needle. C-RFA lesions will be created by using the typical C-RFA protocol. Upon completion needle will be removed. Following ablation, 0.5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine will be injected at the site of the ablated neuroma to provide post procedure analgesia.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Cooled Radiofrequency Ablation
RFA procedures will be performed with modification accounting for appropriate C-RFA technique. Participant will be positioned prone and skin prepped with chloroprep. Ultrasound probe will be placed on residual limb at a transverse angle in order to view the nerve and associated neuroma in long-axis. The probe will be advanced to the site of the stump neuroma. C-RFA electrode will be placed adjacent to neuroma. Needle will be connected via wire to a cooled radiofrequency generator. Motor and sensory testing will be performed to reproduce or exacerbate the RLP and / or PLP. At the site of the neuroma, 2 mL of local anesthetic will be injected through the needle. C-RFA lesions will be created by using the typical C-RFA protocol. Upon completion needle will be removed. Following ablation, 0.5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine will be injected at the site of the ablated neuroma to provide post procedure analgesia.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Clinical diagnosis lower extremity amputation performed more than 1 year since study enrollment.
3. Residual pain described as burning pain and sensations of movement in the affected amputated limb32.
4. Pain duration of more than 6 months despite a trial of conservative therapy (medications, physical therapy) for 2 months.
5. Ultrasound and / or MRI imaging pathology consistent with clinical symptoms and signs.
6. Greater than 50% pain relief with a diagnostic neuroma block
Exclusion Criteria
2. Contraindications to diagnostic block or treatment ablation (active infection, bleeding disorders, and pregnancy or breastfeeding, active immunosuppression, participation in another phantom or residual limb pain trial within the last 30 days
3. Non-neurogenic source of residual or phantom limb pain.
4. Active moderate to severe lumbar radiculopathy.
5. Any injection in the residual limb within the last 30 days.
6. Severe uncontrolled medical condition as determined by treating physician.
7. Severe psychological illness.
8. History of Inflammatory arthritis.
9. Malignancy within past 5 years except basal cell or squamous cell skin cancer. 10. Current opioid use exceeding50morphinemilligram equivalents per day.
11\. A history of alcohol or drug abuse within past 5 years. 12. Use of any investigational drug within past 30 days. 13. Pending litigation involving participant's residual limb pain. 14. Incarceration
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Utah
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Zack McCormick
Zachary McCormick, MD FAAPMR, Associate Professor, Director of Clinical Spine Research, Director of Interventional Spine and Musculoskeletal Medicine Fellowship
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IRB 106250
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.