Perineuromal Botulinum Toxin Injection for War-Related Postamputation Pain: A Pragmatic, Multicenter, Comparative Effectiveness Study

0Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the comparative effectiveness of botulinum toxin (BT) injections versus comprehensive medical and surgical treatment (CMST) for war-related postamputation pain. Design: A prospective, comparative-effectiveness study evaluating outcomes in patients treated with BT or CMST at 2 Ukrainian hospitals. Setting: Two Ukrainian hospitals treating war-related injuries. Participants: Patients with at least 2 out of 10 residual limb pain (RLP) or phantom limb pain (PLP) were included. Interventions: In the BT group (N=39), patients received BT injections around neuromas in the residual limb (perineuromal), subcutaneously over sensitized tissue, and/or as trigger point injections, plus physical and pharmacotherapy as indicated. The CMST group (N=127) received injections, surgical therapies, physical and pharmacotherapies, and integrative treatments. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measures were mean reduction in RLP and PLP at 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcome measures were RLP and PLP, and success was defined as ≥30% decrease in postamputation pain. Results: At 3 months, the reduction in PLP scores was greater in the CMST than the BT group (2.0±2.0 vs 3.5±3.5, P=.002). For RLP, the reduction did not differ significantly between groups (BT 2.0±2.5 vs CMST 3.0±2.8, P=.50). Conversely, the reduction in PLP at 1 month favored BT (4.0±3.5 vs 1.0±2.5, P>.001), with no significant difference in RLP reduction. Responder rates favored BT for PLP at 1 month (68.6% vs 43.1%, P=.01), and CMST for RLP (97.1% vs 63.2%, P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Segin, N., Smolynets, R., Barroso, J., Matolinets, N., Pasquina, P. F., & Cohen, S. P. (2026). Perineuromal Botulinum Toxin Injection for War-Related Postamputation Pain: A Pragmatic, Multicenter, Comparative Effectiveness Study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 107(5), 945–954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2025.09.026

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free