Back

Percutaneous Peripheral Nerve Stimulation as an Ancillary Treatment Following Nerve Repair Surgery

Maisuria, S.; Mondriguez-Gonzalez, A.; Franz, C. K.; Swong, K.; Texakalidis, P.

2025-06-06 rehabilitation medicine and physical therapy
10.1101/2025.06.05.25329049 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background and AimsNeuropathic pain after peripheral nerve injury (PNI) severely degrades quality of life. Peripheral nerve stimulation (PN-Stim) offers a potential treatment for pain relief after PNI, although its efficacy in managing neuropathic pain post-nerve repair surgery remains unexplored. MethodsWe analyzed 16 consecutive patients aged 18 and above who received PN-Stim implantation post-nerve repair surgery. Patients under 18 years of age, pregnant, and those with PN-Stim for off-label uses were excluded from our study. The primary outcome was pain score reduction, which was evaluated by Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes included motor functional recovery and opioid usage which were evaluated by manual muscle testing (MMT) and Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MME) quantification, respectively. Statistical analyses utilized paired two-tailed T-tests and Wilcoxon sign tests, contingent on data normalcy. ResultsPain scores decreased significantly post-PN-Stim implantation (mean pre-placement: 7.35, post-placement: 2.56; p < 0.05). MMT scores showed improvement in 13 patients, with two achieving the maximum MMT score (p < 0.05). Chronic opioid usage was observed to decrease in 6 out of 7 patients who were using them (p < 0.05). No significant adverse effects were seen after implantation. InterpretationThe results suggests that PN-Stim is a safe and effective treatment for reducing pain in patients with PNI who have undergone post-nerve repair surgery, without interfering with motor recovery. Future prospective research to explore the role of PN-Stim in pain management and its interaction with functional recovery is warranted.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.