Causalgia: A Review of Nerve Resection, Amputation, Immunotherapy, and Amputated Limb CRPS II Pathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Causalgia and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type II with nerve injury can be difficult to treat. Surgical peripheral nerve denervation for causalgia has been largely abandoned by pain clinicians because of a perception that this may aggravate a central component (anesthesia dolorosa). METHODS: We selectively searched Pubmed, Cochrane, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, and Scopus from 1947 for articles, books, and book chapters for evidence of surgical treatments (nerve resection and amputation) and treatment related to autoimmunity and immune deficiency with CRPS. RESULTS: = 8). Twelve reports were found of autoimmunity with CRPS, one paper of these on associated immune deficiency and autoimmunity, and two were chosen for discussion regarding treatment with immunoglobulin and one by plasma exchange. We document a report of a detailed and unique pathological examination of a CRPS type II affected amputated limb and related successful treatment with immunoglobulin. CONCLUSIONS: Nerve resection, with grafting, and relocation may relieve uncomplicated causalgia and CRPS type II in some patients in the long term. However, an unrecognized and treatable immunological condition may underly some CRPS II cases and can lead to the ultimate failure of surgical treatments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".