Objective: To provide a proof-of-concept study demonstrating that the decades old procedure of cryoneurotomy, used traditionally for analgesia, is a safe adjunctive and effective treatment for limb spasticity. Design: Case series. Setting: Publicly funded outpatient hospital spasticity clinic and community interventional anesthesia clinic. Participants: Patients (N=3) who had plateaued with standard of care spasticity treatments including botulinum toxin. Two hemiplegic stroke patients with elbow spasticity and 1 pregnant patient with multiple sclerosis and a spastic equinovarus foot for whom botulinum toxin was now contraindicated. Interventions: Selective anesthetic diagnostic motor nerve blocks with ultrasound and e-stimulation with 1cc of 1% lidocaine to the motor nerve to the targeted spastic muscle were performed to either the musculocutaneous nerve to brachialis, radial nerve to the brachioradialis or the tibial nerve. If the benefits included improved active and passive range motion and or decreased clonus, a percutaneous cryoneurotomy was performed. Main Outcome Measures Active and passive range of motion were measured using the Modified Tardieu Scale. The change in resistance to passive stretch was measured using the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS). Videos of the before and after treatment were collected. Results: Both elbows’ treatments resulted in MAS improving from a 3 to a 1+. Greatly improved active range of motion was noted at 94 and 64 degrees, respectively, as well as improvements in passive range on the Modified Tardieu Scale. The tibial nerve cryoneurotomy resulted in improvements in all parameters with a much improved gait. Results were maintained up to 17 months of follow-up. Conclusion: Cryoneurotomy as a treatment for spasticity is a novel safe adjuvant treatment. Our initial results suggest patients can achieve significantly increased active and passive range of motion in the upper extremity and decreased clonus, and improved gait after tibial nerve cryoneurotomy.

Objective: The aim of the study is to report adverse effects from clinical studies on ultrasound-guided percutaneous cryoneurolysis for spasticity. Design: Patients were prospectively enrolled in three studies at a single institution. Cryoneurolysis was performed to primarily motor nerve branches (medial and lateral pectoral, musculocutaneous, radial, median, ulnar, tibial, obturator) and mixed motor sensory nerve trunks (median, ulnar, suprascapular, radial, and tibial). Results: Cryoneurolysis was performed for 277 nerves (99 mixed motor sensory), on 113 patients (59 F, 54 M, average age 54.4 yrs). One patient had a local skin infection and two patients had bruising or swelling; all resolved within 1 mo. Nine reported nerve pain or dysesthesia (two motor, seven mixed motor sensory nerves). Four received no treatment, four oral or topical medications, two perineural injections, one botulinum toxin. Three patients’ symptoms remained until 3 mos and one had numbness at six. One patient had botulinum toxin injections for cramping. All had at minimum 3-mo follow-up; seven withdrew (x̄ = 5.4 mos), four passed away. None of these 11 reported adverse effects. Conclusions: A total of 96.75% of nerve treatments had no pain or dysesthesias beyond treatment. Few had pain or numbness beyond 3 mos. Cryoneurolysis has potential to be a safe spasticity treatment with manageable adverse effects.

Background. Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) after fracture is a cause of pain, dysfunction, and potentially permanent disability. The evidence for treatment with oral corticosteroids is growing and supported by several international guidelines; however, treatment is not widely offered.Objective. Rapid recognition and treatment of complex regional pain in the upper extremity after acute injury as a disease modifying and potentially curative treatment.Methods. The present study was a case series involving three patients who developed CRPS after a trauma to the neck and/or upper limb. Patients were screened by clinical examination and bone scan and met the Budapest criteria.Results. Resolution of pain, swelling, and disability in all three patients.Discussion. There is increasing support, based on the existing evidence and clinical outcomes, for the use of prednisone to treat the acute phase of CRPS and as a promising treatment to halt the progression of the phenomenon and potentially cure the condition; however, widespread use of prednisone likely remains low, potentially resulting in long-term pain, joint contracture, and disability. A large-scale randomized control trial has not been performed.Conclusion. Corticosteroids can be an effective treatment option for CRPS after fracture.

Objective. The objective of this study was to evaluate prednisone effectiveness on complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) features in a community-based outpatient rehabilitation setting. Design. A single-centre, retrospective inception cohort design was used. Inclusion criteria were CRPS diagnosis according to the Budapest criteria, involvement of multiple joints, treatment with prednisone, and duration of symptoms less than one year. Typical prednisone treatment was 28-day taper regimen with 60 mg. Patient symptoms and signs were compared before and after treatment. Results. There were 39 patients who met inclusion criteria for analysis. Duration of symptoms before treatment was 80.8 ± 67.7 days. Following treatment, 19 (48.7%) patients reported complete pain resolution, 19 (48.7%) patients reported decreased pain permitting functional use, and 1 (2.6%) patient reported no improvement. All symptoms and signs decreased significantly following oral prednisone treatment (p<0.001). Range of motion (ROM) deficits persisted in 19 (49%) patients. However, 17 of these patients reported functional ROM recovery. Degree of ROM recovery and time-to-treatment had low positive correlation (r = 0.354, p<0.05). Logistic regression did not demonstrate associations among any patient factors and clinical outcomes. Conclusions. These data support short-course prednisone treatment for acute and subacute CRPS with multijoint involvement in a community rehabilitation setting. The association between time-to-treatment and ROM recovery suggests earlier treatment may result in improved ROM outcomes.

Introduction:Spasticity is the main complication of many upper motor neuron disorders. Many studies describe neuro-orthopedic surgeries for the correction of joint and limb deformities due to spasticity, though less in the upper extremity. The bulk of care provided to patients with spasticity is provided by rehabilitation clinicians, however, few of the surgical outcomes have been summarized or appraised in the rehabilitation literature.Objective:To review the literature for neuro-orthopedic surgical techniques in the upper limb and evaluate the level of evidence for their efficacy in adult patients with spasticity.Method:Electronic databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for English, French as well as Farsi languages human studies from 1980 to July 2, 2020. After removing duplicated articles, 2,855 studies were screened and 80 were found to be included based on the criteria. The studies were then divided into two groups, with 40 in each trial and non-trial. The results of the 40 trial articles were summarized in three groups: shoulder, elbow and forearm, and wrist and finger, and each group was subdivided based on the types of intervention.Results:The level of evidence was evaluated by Sackett's approach. There were no randomized control trial studies found. About, 4 studies for shoulder, 8 studies for elbow and forearm, 26 studies for wrist and finger (including 4 for the thumb in palm deformity), and 2 systematic reviews were found. Around, two out of 40 trial articles were published in the rehabilitation journals, one systematic review in Cochrane, and the remaining 38 were published in the surgical journals.Conclusion:Most surgical procedures are complex, consisting of several techniques based on the problems and goals of the patient. This complexity interferes with the evaluation of every single procedure. Heterogenicity of the participants and the absence of clinical trial studies are other factors of not having a single conclusion. This review reveals that almost all the studies suggested good results after the surgery in carefully selected cases with goals of reducing spasticity and improvement in function, pain, hygiene, and appearance. A more unified approach and criteria are needed to facilitate a collaborative, evidence-based, patient referral, and surgical selection pathway.