1
|
Festin C, Ortmayr J, Maierhofer U, Tereshenko V, Blumer R, Schmoll M, Carrero-Rojas G, Luft M, Laengle G, Farina D, Bergmeister KD, Aszmann OC. Creation of a biological sensorimotor interface for bionic reconstruction. Nat Commun 2024; 15:5337. [PMID: 38914540 PMCID: PMC11196281 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-49580-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2024] [Indexed: 06/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Neuromuscular control of bionic arms has constantly improved over the past years, however, restoration of sensation remains elusive. Previous approaches to reestablish sensory feedback include tactile, electrical, and peripheral nerve stimulation, however, they cannot recreate natural, intuitive sensations. Here, we establish an experimental biological sensorimotor interface and demonstrate its potential use in neuroprosthetics. We transfer a mixed nerve to a skeletal muscle combined with glabrous dermal skin transplantation, thus forming a bi-directional communication unit in a rat model. Morphological analyses indicate reinnervation of the skin, mechanoreceptors, NMJs, and muscle spindles. Furthermore, sequential retrograde labeling reveals specific sensory reinnervation at the level of the dorsal root ganglia. Electrophysiological recordings show reproducible afferent signals upon tactile stimulation and tendon manipulation. The results demonstrate the possibility of surgically creating an interface for both decoding efferent motor control, as well as encoding afferent tactile and proprioceptive feedback, and may indicate the way forward regarding clinical translation of biological communication pathways for neuroprosthetic applications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Festin
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Center for Biomedical Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Joachim Ortmayr
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Udo Maierhofer
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Center for Biomedical Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Vlad Tereshenko
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Center for Biomedical Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Roland Blumer
- Center for Anatomy and Cell Biology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Martin Schmoll
- Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Génova Carrero-Rojas
- Center for Anatomy and Cell Biology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Matthias Luft
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Center for Biomedical Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital St. Poelten, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria
| | - Gregor Laengle
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Center for Biomedical Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Dario Farina
- Department of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Konstantin D Bergmeister
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Plastic, Aesthetic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital St. Poelten, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems, Austria
| | - Oskar C Aszmann
- Clinical Laboratory for Bionic Extremity Reconstruction, Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lee JC, Kemp SW, Kung TA. Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interface Surgery for the Management of Chronic Posttraumatic Neuropathic Pain. Semin Plast Surg 2024; 38:19-24. [PMID: 38495062 PMCID: PMC10942837 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1778078] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/19/2024]
Abstract
Chronic pain resulting from peripheral nerve injury remains a common issue in the United States and affects 7 to 10% of the population. Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interface (RPNI) surgery is an innovative surgical procedure designed to treat posttraumatic neuropathic pain, particularly when a symptomatic neuroma is present on clinical exam. RPNI surgery involves implantation of a transected peripheral nerve into an autologous free muscle graft to provide denervated targets to regenerating axons. RPNI surgery has been found in animal and human studies to be highly effective in addressing postamputation pain. While most studies have reported its uses in the amputation patient population for the treatment of neuroma and phantom limb pain, RPNI surgery has recently been used to address refractory headache, postmastectomy pain, and painful donor sites from the harvest of neurotized flaps. This review summarizes the current understanding of RPNI surgery for the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer C. Lee
- Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Stephen W.P. Kemp
- Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Theodore A. Kung
- Section of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gonzalez M, Bismuth A, Lee C, Chestek CA, Gates DH. Artificial referred sensation in upper and lower limb prosthesis users: a systematic review. J Neural Eng 2022; 19:10.1088/1741-2552/ac8c38. [PMID: 36001115 PMCID: PMC9514130 DOI: 10.1088/1741-2552/ac8c38] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/29/2022] [Accepted: 08/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
Objective.Electrical stimulation can induce sensation in the phantom limb of individuals with amputation. It is difficult to generalize existing findings as there are many approaches to delivering stimulation and to assessing the characteristics and benefits of sensation. Therefore, the goal of this systematic review was to explore the stimulation parameters that effectively elicited referred sensation, the qualities of elicited sensation, and how the utility of referred sensation was assessed.Approach.We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Engineering Village through January of 2022 to identify relevant papers. We included papers which electrically induced referred sensation in individuals with limb loss and excluded papers that did not contain stimulation parameters or outcome measures pertaining to stimulation. We extracted information on participant demographics, stimulation approaches, and participant outcomes.Main results.After applying exclusion criteria, 49 papers were included covering nine stimulation methods. Amplitude was the most commonly adjusted parameter (n= 25), followed by frequency (n= 22), and pulse width (n= 15). Of the 63 reports of sensation quality, most reported feelings of pressure (n= 52), paresthesia (n= 48), or vibration (n= 40) while less than half (n= 29) reported a sense of position or movement. Most papers evaluated the functional benefits of sensation (n= 33) using force matching or object identification tasks, while fewer papers quantified subjective measures (n= 16) such as pain or embodiment. Only 15 studies (36%) observed percept intensity, quality, or location over multiple sessions.Significance.Most studies that measured functional performance demonstrated some benefit to providing participants with sensory feedback. However, few studies could experimentally manipulate sensation location or quality. Direct comparisons between studies were limited by variability in methodologies and outcome measures. As such, we offer recommendations to aid in more standardized reporting for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Gonzalez
- Department of Robotics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| | - Alex Bismuth
- School of Kinesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| | - Christina Lee
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| | - Cynthia A Chestek
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| | - Deanna H Gates
- School of Kinesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wu J, Zhang Y, Zhang X, Lin Z, Li G. Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces Effectively Prevent Neuroma Formation After Sciatic Nerve Transection in Rats. Front Mol Neurosci 2022; 15:938930. [PMID: 35875668 PMCID: PMC9301297 DOI: 10.3389/fnmol.2022.938930] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2022] [Accepted: 06/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective The disordered growth of nerve stumps after amputation leading to the formation of neuromas is an important cause of postoperative pain in amputees. This severely affects the patients' quality of life. Regenerative peripheral nerve interfaces (RPNIs) are an emerging method for neuroma prevention, but its postoperative nerve growth and pathological changes are yet to be studied. Methods The rat sciatic nerve transection model was used to study the effectiveness of RPNI in this experiment. The RPNI (experimental) group (n = 11) underwent RPNI implantation after sciatic nerve transection, while the control group (n = 11) only underwent sciatic nerve transection. Autotomy behavior, ultrasonography, and histopathology were observed for 2 months postoperatively. Results Compared to the control group, the incidence and size of the neuromas formed and the incidence and extent of autotomy were significantly reduced in the RPNI group. The axon density in the stump and degree of stump fibrosis were also significantly reduced in the RPNI group. Conclusion RPNI effectively prevented the formation of neuromas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiaqing Wu
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Yajun Zhang
- Trauma Medicine Center, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Xiaoyuan Zhang
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Zhiyu Lin
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Guangxue Li
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China
- *Correspondence: Guangxue Li
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kubiak CA, Svientek SR, Dehdashtian A, Lawera NG, Nadarajan V, Bratley JV, Kung TA, Cederna PS, Kemp SWP. Physiologic signaling and viability of the muscle cuff regenerative peripheral nerve interface (MC-RPNI) for intact peripheral nerves. J Neural Eng 2021; 18. [PMID: 34359056 DOI: 10.1088/1741-2552/ac1b6b] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2021] [Accepted: 08/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Background. Robotic exoskeleton devices have become a promising modality for restoration of extremity function in individuals with limb loss or functional weakness. However, there exists no consistent or reliable way to record efferent motor action potentials from intact peripheral nerves to control device movement. Peripheral nerve motor action potentials are similar in amplitude to that of background noise, producing an unfavorable signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) that makes these signals difficult to detect and interpret. To address this issue, we have developed the muscle cuff regenerative peripheral nerve interface (MC-RPNI), a construct consisting of a free skeletal muscle graft wrapped circumferentially around an intact peripheral nerve. Over time, the muscle graft regenerates, and the intact nerve undergoes collateral axonal sprouting to reinnervate the muscle. The MC-RPNI amplifies efferent motor action potentials by several magnitudes, thereby increasing the SNR, allowing for higher fidelity signaling and detection of motor intention. The goal of this study was to characterize the signaling capabilities and viability of the MC-RPNI over time.Methods. Thirty-seven rats were randomly assigned to one of five experimental groups (Groups A-E). For MC-RPNI animals, their contralateral extensor digitorum longus (EDL) muscle was harvested and trimmed to either 8 mm (Group A) or 13 mm (Group B) in length, wrapped circumferentially around the intact ipsilateral common peroneal (CP) nerve, secured, and allowed to heal for 3 months. Additionally, one 8 mm (Group C) and one 13 mm (Group D) length group had an epineurial window created in the CP nerve immediately preceding MC-RPNI creation. Group E consisted of sham surgery animals. At 3 months, electrophysiologic analyses were conducted to determine the signaling capabilities of the MC-RPNI. Additionally, electromyography and isometric force analyses were performed on the CP-innervated EDL to determine the effects of the MC-RPNI on end organ function. Following evaluation, the CP nerve, MC-RPNI, and ipsilateral EDL muscle were harvested for histomorphometric analysis.Results. Study endpoint analysis was performed at 3 months post-surgery. All rats displayed visible muscle contractions in both the MC-RPNI and EDL following proximal CP nerve stimulation. Compound muscle action potentials were recorded from the MC-RPNI following proximal CP nerve stimulation and ranged from 3.67 ± 0.58 mV to 6.04 ± 1.01 mV, providing efferent motor action potential amplification of 10-20 times that of a normal physiologic nerve action potential. Maximum tetanic isometric force (Fo) testing of the distally-innervated EDL muscle in MC-RPNI groups producedFo(2341 ± 114 mN-2832 ± 102 mN) similar to controls (2497 ± 122 mN), thus demonstrating that creation of MC-RPNIs did not adversely impact the function of the distally-innervated EDL muscle. Overall, comparison between all MC-RPNI sub-groups did not reveal any statistically significant differences in signaling capabilities or negative effects on distal-innervated muscle function as compared to the control group.Conclusions. MC-RPNIs have the capability to provide efferent motor action potential amplification from intact nerves without adversely impacting distal muscle function. Neither the size of the muscle graft nor the presence of an epineurial window in the nerve had any significant impact on the ability of the MC-RPNI to amplify efferent motor action potentials from intact nerves. These results support the potential for the MC-RPNI to serve as a biologic nerve interface to control advanced exoskeleton devices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carrie A Kubiak
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America
| | - Shelby R Svientek
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America
| | - Amir Dehdashtian
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America
| | - Nathan G Lawera
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America
| | - Vidhya Nadarajan
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America
| | - Jarred V Bratley
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America
| | - Theodore A Kung
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America
| | - Paul S Cederna
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America.,Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| | - Stephen W P Kemp
- Department of Surgery, Section of Plastic Surgery, The University of Michigan Health System, 1150 W Medical Center Drive, Medical Sciences Research Building II, Rm.A570A, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5456, United States of America.,Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gstoettner C, Laengle G, Salminger S, Festin C, Platzgummer H, Aszmann OC. [Surgical management of peripheral nerves after extremity loss]. DER ORTHOPADE 2021; 50:14-23. [PMID: 33231741 PMCID: PMC7815562 DOI: 10.1007/s00132-020-04032-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Hintergrund Nach Verlust einer Gliedmaße ist es die Aufgabe des Chirurgen, einen möglichst schmerzfreien und belastbaren Stumpf zu formen. Hierbei kommt insbesondere an der oberen Extremität ein funktioneller Aspekt hinzu, da zur Steuerung myoelektrischer Prothesen entsprechende Muskelsignale notwendig sind. Der Umgang mit peripheren Nerven im Stumpfbereich nimmt sowohl hinsichtlich der Schmerztherapie als auch der funktionellen Mensch-Maschinen-Anbindung eine zentrale Rolle ein. Ziel der Arbeit Die Darstellung aktueller chirurgischer Verfahren zum Umgang mit peripheren Nerven nach Extremitätenamputation. Material und Methoden Es erfolgt eine Literaturrecherche bzgl. chirurgischer Prophylaxe und Therapie von Neurom- und Phantomschmerzen, sowie zu Techniken zur Verbesserung der funktionellen Schnittstelle zwischen Stumpf und Prothese. Anhand relevanter Arbeiten sowie der Erfahrungen der Autoren werden entsprechende Empfehlungen formuliert. Ergebnisse und Diskussion Es gibt eine große Anzahl an verschiedenen Operationstechniken, insbesondere im Umgang mit schmerzhaften Neuromen. Von den klassischen Verfahren findet besonders häufig die intramuskuläre Verlagerung der endständiger Nerven Anwendung. Neuere Techniken wie Targeted Muscle Reinnervation (TMR) und Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interface (RPNI) zielen erstmals darauf ab, dem Nerven auch nach Amputation funktionelle Endorgane zu liefern. Neben der verbesserten Steuerung myoelektrischer Prothesen zeigen diese Verfahren auch exzellente Ergebnisse in Bezug auf Neurom- und Phantomschmerzen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clemens Gstoettner
- Klinisches Labor für Bionische Extremitätenrekonstruktion, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich
| | - Gregor Laengle
- Klinisches Labor für Bionische Extremitätenrekonstruktion, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich
| | - Stefan Salminger
- Klinisches Labor für Bionische Extremitätenrekonstruktion, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich.,Klinische Abteilung für Plastische und Rekonstruktive Chirurgie, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Wien, Österreich
| | - Christopher Festin
- Klinisches Labor für Bionische Extremitätenrekonstruktion, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich
| | - Hannes Platzgummer
- Univ. Klinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Medizinische Universität Wien, Wien, Österreich
| | - Oskar C Aszmann
- Klinisches Labor für Bionische Extremitätenrekonstruktion, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich. .,Klinische Abteilung für Plastische und Rekonstruktive Chirurgie, Universitätsklinik für Chirurgie, Medizinische Universität Wien, Wien, Österreich.
| |
Collapse
|