ArticleBrain communications2025
Phantom limb experience after brachial plexus anaesthesia.
Article in Brain communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There are more than two million amputees in the USA, and almost all will experience phantom limb sensations (PLS), describing the missing limb as still present. They may also experience intense pain, known as phantom limb pain (PLP), a considerable factor in poor quality of life. In some upper extremity amputees and following brachial plexus avulsion injury (BPAI), hand digits can be detected and mapped to distinct facial skin areas, termed hand-to-face remapping. In this study, we analysed PLS following brachial plexus anaesthesia (BPA) administered prior to upper limb surgeries. Our 39 participants had planned shoulder, wrist or hand surgery. We sought to determine the time course for the emergence of phantom limb experiences after BPA up to the following 24 hours in participants with intact limbs. We also investigated whether there was hand-to-face remapping, suggesting potential cortical reorganization, or changes in proprioception before and after the induction of BPA. Twenty (54%) participants reported PLS immediately after the onset of BPA (T2), and 28 (72%) participants altered proprioception (AP) after surgery (T3). However, neither PLP nor hand mapping onto the face was reported or evoked. PLS were seen earlier than AP. We conclude that PLS arise rapidly after BPA-induced temporary deafferentation of the upper limb and might serve as a model for the permanent deafferentation experienced in individuals with a major upper limb amputation or BPAI. These results contribute to defining a time course for changes after BPA and increase our understanding of how phantom limb phenomena might arise following limb amputation or BPAI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.