The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Phantom limbs and related phenomena in recent traumatic amputations
Abstract
Introduction Venous sinus stenting (VSS) has emerged as an alternative treatment for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) patients with evidence of transverse-sigmoid stenosis and symptoms refractory to medical therapy. Though its efficacy in alleviating visual deficits, papilledema, headache and nausea is promising, a substantial rate of restenosis can occur either within or adjacent to the stented segment. It is possible that increase of, or failure to lose, body-weight could potentially be a mechanism behind restenosis, as central venous pressure would remain elevated. We report IIH patients who underwent VSS at our institution and compare characteristics between those with and without restenosis, focusing on patient’s body mass index (BMI). Methods Our institution’s database was retrospectively analyzed. We included all IIH patients who underwent VSS between January 2021 March 2022. Analysis between restenosis and non-restenosis groups was performed. Body mass index was evaluated as a continuous variable and also as categorical by stratification into normal (<25), overweight (25–29.9), obesity class I (30–34.9), obesity class II (35–39.9), obesity class III (≥40). BMI groups were dichotomized into normal or mildly obese (normal, overweight and obesity class I) and moderate to severely obese (obesity classes II and III). Results A total of 55 patients were included, of which 7 (12.7%) had restenosis. Age, sex, and comorbidities were similar between non-restenosis and restenosis patients. Opening pressure on lumbar puncture was similar between the groups (non-restenosis, 35.1 vs restenosis, 38.1, P=0.304). Median BMI at time of procedure was similar between the groups (non-restenosis, 35.1 vs non-restenosis, 37.1, P=0.958). Median pre-stenting pressure gradient was not significantly different between the groups (non-restenosis, 17 vs restenosis, 21, P=0.280), and neither was immediate post-stenting pressure gradient (non-restenosis, 1 vs restenosis, 3, P=0.230). Median time of follow-up was not significantly different between the groups (non-restenosis, 676 days vs restenosis, 597 days, P=0.319). Median BMI at last follow-up or at date of restenosis detection was not significantly different between the groups (non-restenosis, 36.1 vs restenosis, 36.5, P=0.904). Neither stratification nor dichotomization of BMI revealed differences between the groups. Median BMI change from procedure to last follow-up was not different between the groups (non-restenosis, 0.1 vs restenosis, 0, P=0.552). Reduction in BMI class was also not different between the groups (non-restenosis, 12.5% vs restenosis, 28.6%, P=0.645). Conclusions Idiopathic intracranial hypertension patients with venous sinus stenosis treated with VSS who had restenosis were similar to those who did not with regards to demographics, pressure gradients and duration of follow-up. Body mass index did not predict restenosis as we hypothesized. Disclosures J. Cappuzzo: None. A. Monteiro: None. N. Siddiqi: None. A. Baig: None. W. Khawar: None. B. Donnelly: None. S. Housley: None. M. Waqas: None. E. Levy: 2; C; Claret Medical, GLG Consulting, Guidepoint Global, Imperial Care, Medtronic, Rebound, StimMed, Misionix, Mosiac, Clarion, IRRAS. 4; C; NeXtGen Biologics, RAPID Medical, Claret Medical, Cognition Medical, Imperative Care, Rebound Therapeutics, StimMed, Three Rivers Medical. A. Siddiqui: 2; C; Amnis Therapeutics, Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boston Scientific, Canon Medical Systems USA, Inc., Cardinal Health 200, LLC, Cerebrotech Medical Systems, Inc., Cerenovus, Cerevatech Medical, Inc.,. 4; C; Adona Medical, Inc., Amnis Therapeutics, Bend IT Technologies, Ltd., BlinkTBI, Inc, Buffalo Technology Partners, Inc., Cardinal Consultants, LLC, Cerebrotech Medical Systems, Inc, Cerevatech Medical.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Pain and the global burden of disease
Rice, A. S. C., Smith, B. H., & Blyth, F. M. (2016) · Pain · doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000454 · Cited by 498
Chapman, C. R., & Vierck, C. J. (2017) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2016.11.004 · Cited by 423
On the relation of injury to pain: the John J. Bonica Lecture
Wall, P. D. (1979) · Pain · doi:10.1016/0304-3959(79)90047-2 · Cited by 356
Self-citationPhantom limbs, the self and the brain: The D.O. Hebb memorial lecture
Melzack, R. (1989) · Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne · doi:10.1037/h0079793 · Cited by 260
Prophylactic Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces to Prevent Postamputation Pain
Kubiak, C. A., Kemp, S. W. P., Cederna, P. S., & Kung, T. A. (2019) · Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery · doi:10.1097/prs.0000000000005922 · Cited by 175
Metadata
- Authors
- CARLEN, P. L., WALL, P. D., NADVORNA, H., & STEINBACH, T.
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 1978-03
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 211-211
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W2064855335
- Cited by
- 277
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Phantom limbs and related phenomena in recent traumatic amputations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/wnl.28.3.211
- The paper
- CARLEN, P. L., WALL, P. D., NADVORNA, H., & STEINBACH, T. (1978). Phantom limbs and related phenomena in recent traumatic amputations. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.28.3.211
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.