Brain Advance Access originally published online on January 5, 2005
Brain 2005 128(2):308-320; doi:10.1093/brain/awh350
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Brain Vol. 128 No. 2 © Guarantors of Brain 2005; all rights reserved
Dissociation of phantom limb phenomena from stump tactile spatial acuity and sensory thresholds
1 Toronto Western Research Institute, University Health Network, Departments of 2 Physical Therapy, 3 Anesthesia and Public Health Sciences, 4 Surgery and 5 Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, 6 St John's Rehabilitation Hospital and West Park Healthcare Centre, 7 Department of Psychology and School of Kinesiology and Health Science, York University and 8 Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, University Health Network and Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada
Correspondence to: Karen D. Davis, PhD, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, 399 Bathurst Street, Room MP14-306, Toronto, Ontario M5T 2S8, Canada E-mail: kdavis{at}uhnres.utoronto.ca
Most amputees experience phantom limb sensations and/or phantom limb pain as well as residual limb (stump) pain that are resistant to treatment. Phantom phenomena are not homogeneous; each patient presents with a unique combination of spontaneous or evoked sensations, pain, and/or awareness. In an effort to understand the underlying mechanisms, postamputation pain has been subclassified based on the perceived sensory qualities reported by the individual. However, little is known about the relationship between subjective phantom phenomena and sensory function of the residual stump. The aim of the present study was to determine if sensory processing, as measured psychophysically, reflected subjective reports of specific qualities of phantom and/or stump sensory phenomena. Twelve individuals who had recently (within 6 months) undergone traumatic unilateral upper extremity amputation participated in the study. Limb temperature, thermal thresholds, tactile sensory thresholds and tactile spatial acuity were compared between the residual limb and the intact limb, and related to patient reports of specific stump and phantom sensory phenomena. All but one subject reported phantom sensations and/or phantom pain. The remaining subject reported only stump pain. Mean skin temperature of the residual limb was significantly lower than that of the intact contralateral limb by approximately 0.9°C in the proximal portion of the stump and 1.7°C at the stump tip. However, the temperature of the stump (compared with the intact limb) did not reflect subjective reports of stump or phantom limb thermal characteristics. Thermal threshold abnormalities differed among patients, and did not suggest any pattern of small fibre loss of function or generalized hyperexcitability. Other than within grafted tissue or near the scar area, skin areas that the patient described as abnormally sensitive or tender to touch were not accompanied by corresponding abnormalities in static tactile thresholds or tactile spatial acuity. Tactile spatial acuity was heightened near the scar area only. The proportion of subjects who had decreased two-point discrimination thresholds at the stump did not differ significantly according to the reporting or non-reporting of dual percepts. Thus, despite a common injury, the sensory abnormalities varied within this cohort of subjects. In addition, psychophysical threshold measures of sensory function did not reflect, in any simple way, subjective phantom phenomena. Therefore, classification of phantom phenomena based on peripheral sensory function may be a misleading step in the search for specific mechanisms underlying postamputation sensory phenomena.