MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406144093 · doi:10.1097/as9.0000000000000535

Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interface Surgery to Treat Chronic Postamputation Pain: A Prospective Study in Major Lower Limb Amputation Patients

2025· article· en· W4406144093 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCongressionally Directed Medical Research Programs
KeywordsMedicinePhantom limbPhantom painAmputationNeuromaChronic painProspective cohort studySurgeryNeuropathic painPsychosocialAnesthesiaPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The objective was to assess the postsurgical outcomes of regenerative peripheral nerve interface (RPNI) surgery in a prospective cohort of major lower extremity amputation patients with chronic postamputation pain. Background: Chronic pain in lower limb amputation patients is commonly the result of neuroma formation after traumatic peripheral nerve injury. By implanting more proximal transected nerve ends into autologous free muscle grafts, RPNI surgery can treat postamputation pain by diminishing the development of neuromas. RPNI surgery in prior retrospective studies has been shown to mitigate postamputation pain. Methods: Twenty-two lower limb amputation patients with established chronic postamputation pain were recruited from 2 studies in this prospective study. All patients underwent RPNI surgery to treat identified symptomatic neuromas within the residual limb. Patient-reported outcome instruments were administered preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 week, 4 months, and 12 months to examine residual limb pain (McGill Pain Questionnaire, PROMIS Pain Intensity, and PROMIS Pain Interference), phantom limb pain (modified PROMIS Pain Intensity and Phantom Limb sensation questionnaire), psychosocial status (PHQ-9, GAD-7, and PCS), and functional (OPUS) outcomes. Results: RPNI surgery significantly improved residual limb pain. While phantom limb sensation improved significantly, phantom limb pain demonstrated a modest decrease. Psychosocial outcomes also improved significantly after RPNI surgery. Prosthetic use slightly increased, and patients did not experience loss of function. Conclusions: RPNI surgery leverages the processes of reinnervation to successfully treat residual limb pain and improve psychosocial outcomes in patients with chronic postamputation pain. Phantom limb pain may be more difficult to treat in chronic pain patients who have central sensitization at the time of surgery.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.696
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it