Elbow DislocationNERVENCT07259382
Neuro-Inflammation in Extremity Trauma: Risk Verification in Elbow Trauma: The NERVE Study
An observational study of Elbow Dislocation and Elbow Fractures, run by Université de Montréal.
Trial summary
The primary goal of this proposal is to improve the understanding of the mechanisms causing persistent pain and disability in elbow fracture patients and their associated functional limitations. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Elbow Dislocation, Elbow Fractures, Inflammation Biomarkers
- What is being tested?
- Biomarkers evaluation
- How many people
- 60 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Jun 2026to 31 Dec 2030
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patient with an acute elbow surgery with an appointment at the Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal
Who may be able to join
- Adults 18 years or older with an acute elbow fracture and/or dislocation less than a week old
- Open surgery as the chosen treatment
Who cannot join
- Patient with a history of ipsilateral upper limb trauma or pathology, neurological disorder.
- Patient unable to answer questionnaires.
- Patient unavailable for a one-year follow-up, for example from another country.
- Patient with vascular injury or open fracture
- Patient with an active inflammatory disease (ex: rheumatoid arthritis)
- Patient using anti-inflammatory drugs or immunosuppressants at the time of the injury.
- Patient with another acute ipsilateral injury to the upper limb
- Polytrauma patients with other injuries than the elbow fracture and concomitant central or peripheral neurological injury.
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: Neuro-Inflammation in Extremity Trauma: Risk Verification in Elbow Trauma: The NERVE Pilot Cohort Study
The primary goal of this proposal is to improve the understanding of the mechanisms causing persistent pain and disability in elbow fracture patients and their associated functional limitations. The specific objectives are as follows for elbow fractures:
- To describe NI mechanisms using biomarkers; 2) To identify factors related to increased NI biomarkers level; 3) To describe the associations between NI and outcomes; 4) To use these findings to refine a larger fully powered prognostic cohort study Hypotheses
- Level of neuro-inflammation (NI) biomarkers* will be significantly higher in patients presenting with both elbow fracture and CNS injury or PNI.
- Consumption of opioid in mg of morphine equivalent will be higher in patients with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Function, assessed by validated joint and limb specific functional questionnaires and QoL will be worse in patients with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Chronic pain at 3 months will be higher (McGill Pain questionnaire V2, Neuropathic pain questionnaire, NPRS) in patients with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Duration of tourniquet use and nerve dissection will be correlated to elbow fracture outcome with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Target biomarkers based on preliminary study will include, but not be limited to: TNFa, IL6, Substance P, IL-1B, TREM-2, IL-16, CCL22, VEGF-a, BMPs (table 1).
Read the detailed description
Chronic pain after limb fractures remains a challenging clinical problem although scientific and technological advances have made major contributions to improve patient outcomes. Nonetheless, even with an anatomical restoration of the bone architecture, many patients still have major functional limitations and persistent pain. This results in a work productivity loss. In the United States, upper limb injuries generate the highest direct and indirect costs (740M$), followed by lower limb fractures (562M$). Although outcomes following a fracture vary significantly, a "simple" fracture occurring at any time can become a turning point in the patient's life, where they can no longer achieve their pre-fracture functional status. The Canadian Pain Task Force estimates that 8 million Canadians suffer from chronic pain, costing $40 billion annually. This includes a large and understudied group of patients with post traumatic chronic pain, which occurs in up to 50% of patients following fractures. For these patients, opioids are meant to alleviate pain, but substance use disorder is a common problem. Indeed, approximately half of all patients with fractures have significant pain leading to persistent opioid intake 3 months post injury and 40% will suffer from a neuropathic type of pain, which is poorly controlled by medications. Opioid use is also associated with an increased sensitivity to pain (hyperalgesia) and patient dissatisfaction with injury outcome. Complications from prolonged opioid use are numerous, varying from constipation to overdose death. Canada is second worldwide, behind the United States, when it comes to opioid use and mortality. The majority of opioid dependant users were first exposed to opioids through medical prescriptions. This makes it imperative to improve the understanding of pain mechanisms to find alternative treatments to opioids in the management of these injuries.
In clinical practice, it is striking to see how two patients with a similar injury can exhibit completely opposite outcomes: one who has completely healed from the injury and the other with a stiff and painful joint. The reasons for these variations are unclear. A study have shown that only 3.3% of the differences in patient pain levels could be attributed to fracture severity. Given the enormous societal burden of limb injuries it is time for research to investigate the factors that contribute to the 97% of unexplained variability related to post fracture pain. The investigator working hypothesis is that the variability in post-fracture pain is caused by differences in expression of specific proinflammatory cytokines with nociceptive effects. This would explain why most studies strictly focusing on the orthopedic component of limb injury have yielded little improvement in preventing the adverse outcomes experienced by patients, namely chronic pain and loss of function.
Basic science studies have shown that in chronic pain cases, the resolution process following initial inflammation is deficient, leading to an excessive inflammatory response spreading throughout the nervous system long after the injury. This response, globally referred to as neuroinflammation (NI), has been associated with central sensitization, central nervous system (CNS) hyperactivity, allodynia and hyperalgesia. Surprisingly, NI is hardly studied in acute fracture cases, which is shocking given that it could explain chronic pain and disability. Also, some surgical factors may increase peripheral nerve injury (PNI).
Among all upper limb fractures, elbow trauma is the injury most frequently associated with a severe impact on patient function and quality of life. One of the main causes for poor outcomes is the complexity of the elbow joint, which involves three bones and two planes of motion, essential to the position of the hand in space. The flexion extension axis is crucial for eating and hygiene, while forearm pro-supination is mandatory for most professions, from office work to manual labour. Following surgical treatment of an elbow fracture, patients often present with complications, even with adequate bone healing. Indeed, one third of patients complain of ulnar nerve symptoms after distal humerus fracture fixation, and 50% of patients treated surgically for elbow fracture-dislocations will have disabling stiffness and chronic pain. The elbow is ideal to study neuroinflammation and pain as it involves 3 major nerves close to the joint: the radial, ulnar and median nerves. Elbow injury also has a high incidence of associated mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) and peripheral nerve injury (PNI), 20% and 15% respectively.
1.2 Neuroinflammation Neuroinflammation (NI) can take different forms: central and peripheral. Prevouis investigator's results showed that 23.5% of isolated limb injuries also exhibit a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). More specifically, the investigators reported that 20% of ambulatory patients with an elbow fracture have a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Previous studies done by the investigator's team showed that outcomes of patients with a TBI, even mTBI, and a fracture is much poorer, compared to a group of similar patients without TBI, causing a work cessation three time longer (averaging 299 days versus 105 days). Central NI alters acute pain and increases the risk of chronic pain following a limb injury. At the time of brain trauma, brain-resident cells, such as microglia, will produce cytokines and other inflammatory mediators that spread through the peripheral circulatory system causing hypersensitivity and peripheral pain. Damage to the blood-brain barrier (BBB) following traumatic injury, allows circulating peripheral immune cells, produced in response to the fracture and present in high numbers at the site of injury and in immune organs, and the released cytokines to reach the brain and create a hyperactive inflammatory state. Astrocytes and endothelial cells also play a key role in this phenomenon. Importantly, research on US military veterans with orthopaedic injuries has revealed that the presence of mTBI significantly increases the risk of chronic pain and NI, as measured by higher levels of TNF and IL-6. A recent article in Nature also reported that the combined impact of mTBI and fracture to the brain could be permanent, because of the brain's immune memory. Therefore, both the traumatized brain and the fractured limb will evolve more poorly than if each lesion had occurred independently.
There is a spectrum of PNI that can occur at the time of the fracture or during their surgical treatment. It is estimated that these lesions affect between 3% and 10% of trauma extremity patients. In the elbow, certain types of injuries have a much higher rate of PNI; up to 30%. The most benign are called neuropraxia and consist of segmental demyelination. The symptoms include numbness and weakness for a period ranging from a few days to a few weeks. Axonotmesis is a rupture of the axons while the nerve sheath remains intact. Spontaneous healing is possible but will take months. Severe lesions consist in a complete nerve rupture, called neurotmesis. This is rare and requires surgical treatment. The precise incidence of neuropraxia is unknown, because pain following a trauma often hides neurological injury symptoms that heal on their own. These transient lesions contribute to the chronic pain mechanisms, which often lead to persistent opioid consumption.
Neuroinflammation can be the result of an altered, uncontrolled immune response to the peripheral injury. Proinflammatory cytokines such as TNF, IL-1, and IL-6 are rapidly produced after injury, and sometimes expressed for prolonged periods of time if there is no resolution of inflammation solve. Importantly, these proinflammatory cytokines play a major role in the transition from acute to chronic pain, acting as potent mediators of excitatory activity in the CNS through modulation of the glutaminergic system. This increase in excitatory activity also decreases the gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) activity, which further affects CNS homeostasis. Neuroinflammation markers consequently increase in the circulatory system. Preliminary experiments in patients with fractures found a strong correlation between plasma levels of proinflammatory cytokines, as well as some less frequently studied biomarkers such as C1qA, and chronic pain. Notably, the C1qA protein was involved in the development of neuropathic pain in animal models and showed variations related to the sex of rodents. In an ongoing study, the investigators demonstrated that NI biomarkers played a role in pain and outcome after human fracture, including TREM2, IL16, CCL22, VEGF-a (appendix), amongst others.
1.3 Surgical factors A literature review shows that tourniquet use and nerve dissection may play a role in elbow surgery outcome. While a tourniquet is often used to avoid bleeding and give better visibility, the tourniquet causes an inflammatory ischemia/reperfusion reaction. Several studies have shown an impact of the tourniquet on pain in lower limb surgery. Using a tourniquet to treat ankle fractures is associated with a greater consumption of opioids for the first 24 hours and more pain at 5 days and 6 weeks post-surgery. Tourniquet duration was also correlated with increased opioid consumption in a Danish study on 603 patients; patients took 0,43 mg more morphine for each additional 10 minutes with the tourniquet. Furthermore, British Medical Council Neurology guidelines for tourniquet use report an increased risk of complex regional pain syndrome in surgeries with a tourniquet. Peripheral nerve ischemia during tourniquet use, for up to 120 minutes, could promote NI. However, there is a lack of data specific to elbow surgery and tourniquet use, as reported by a meta-analysis. Surgical nerve dissection may also cause peripheral nerve inflammation. A recent systematic review of elbow fractures reported that ulnar nerve transposition is related to more chronic symptoms than nerve identification only. The quality of the articles involved in the review was modest and electromyography (EMG) was not used to measure impairment.
In summary, limb fractures are associated with a high risk of sequelae, even with proper healing of osseous and ligamentous components. Pain and disability leading to chronic opioid intake is a major concern. Elbow joint fractures are an excellent subgroup to study this phenomenon because of the high incidence of concomitant central and peripheral neurological injuries. Moreover, having a homogenous patient group will make it easier to compare functional outcomes with joint specific questionnaires and functional evaluation. The Nerve pilot study is well supported by the basic science literature and designed to study the mechanisms leading to neuro-inflammation in injured human patients, with the long-term goal of understanding factors increasing NI (e.g., concomitant head injury, peripheral nerve injury, surgical factors, demographic characteristics) and its consequences (e.g., acute and chronic pain, disability). It is expected that studying the surgical factors that increase NI will allow surgeons to choose different therapeutic options.
- Conditions
- Elbow Dislocation, Elbow Fractures, Inflammation Biomarkers, TBI Traumatic Brain Injury, Nerve Injury
- Being tested
- Biomarkers evaluation
- Keywords
- Biomarkers, Elbow fracture, elbow dislocation, Nerve injury, TBI
- Medical subject headings
- Elbow Fractures, Brain Injuries, Traumatic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Biomarkers evaluationOther
Participants will undergo blood test that evaluate several inflammatory biomarkers before and after the surgery
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Elbow fracture | Patient with an acute, isolated elbow fracture Receives: Other: Biomarkers evaluation | |
| Elbow fracture and peripheral nerve injury | Patient with an acute elbow fracture and a peripheral nerve injury Receives: Other: Biomarkers evaluation | |
| Ebow fracture and TBI | Patient with an acute elbow fracture and a mild TBI Receives: Other: Biomarkers evaluation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Biomarkers
Five blood samples per subject will be taken at selected intervals to measure the serum levels of the targeted pro-inflammatory cytokines for the 60 selected patients. A blood sample will be collected at the first appointment before surgery. Preoperative and postoperative blood samples will also be collected in the operating room. The first will be taken before skin asepsis and the second will be taken immediately after application of the final wound dressing. Blood from the fracture site (hematoma) will also be collected when possible. The fifth blood sample will be collected at 3 months of follow up. Samples will be stored in a -70°C freezer in each city and sent every 6 months for analysis to Olink, Montreal. Group dosage will be performed for the NI factors and circulating proteins (e.g. cytokines, chemokines, neuropeptides), such as TNF, IL-1, IL-6, IL-16, osteopontin, S100B, NSE, GFAP, Substance P, TREM-2, CCL22, and BMPs.
Measured: Baseline, preoperative, perioperative, immediatly after the intervention, 3months
Secondary outcomes (10)
PREE
The PREE is a validated patient-reported outcome measure designed to assess pain and functional limitations related to elbow disorders. It consists of 20 items divided into two subscales:
Pain Subscale (5 items): Measures pain intensity during various activities. Function Subscale (15 items): Assesses difficulty in performing specific and usual daily activities.
Each item is rated on a scale from 0 (no pain or difficulty) to 10 (worst pain or complete inability). A total score out of 100 is calculated by combining both subscales with equal weighting. Higher scores indicate greater pain and disability.
Method of Measurement: Self-administered questionnaire completed by participants.
Measured: Baseline, preop, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Range of motion
Participant will undergo a range of motion evaluation of the elbow at each time frame, if possible. ROM evaluation will include flexion, extension, pronation and supination. Evaluation will be done with a numeric goniometer by a physicial therapist and evaluate in degree
Measured: Baseline, preop, immediatly after the procedure, 2 weeks, 3-6-12months
Pain assessment
Visual analog pain scale from 0 to 10. 0 would be no pain, 10 worst pain
Measured: Baseline, preop, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Opioïds consumption
Daily medication diary
Measured: Recorded once per day from baseline through 12months
Quick-DASH
Description:
The QuickDASH is a patient-reported outcome measure used to assess physical function and symptoms in individuals with upper limb disorders. It consists of 11 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is transformed to a 0-100 scale, with higher scores indicating greater disability. It is validated for use in clinical trials and is sensitive to changes over time.
Method of Measurement:
Self-administered questionnaire completed by participants.
Measured: Baseline, preop, 2weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
EQ-5D-5L
he EQ-5D-5L is a standardized instrument for measuring health-related quality of life. It includes five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression), each rated on five levels of severity. It also includes a Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS) where participants rate their overall health from 0 to 100. Responses can be converted into a single index value using validated scoring algorithms. Higher index values and VAS scores indicate better health status.
Method of Measurement:
Self-administered questionnaire completed by participants.
Measured: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Rivermead
The RPQ is a patient-reported outcome measure used to assess the severity of post-concussion symptoms following traumatic brain injury. It includes 16 items rated on a 5-point scale, comparing current symptoms to pre-injury status. The questionnaire is divided into two scoring clusters: RPQ-3 (early physical symptoms) and RPQ-13 (later cognitive and emotional symptoms). Total scores range from 0 to 64, with higher scores indicating greater symptom severity. The RPQ is validated and widely used in concussion research and clinical practice
Method of Measurement:
Self-administered questionnaire completed by participants.
Measured: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
S-LANSS
The S-LANSS is a self-administered questionnaire used to identify pain of predominantly neuropathic origin. It includes 7 items assessing sensory symptoms and pain characteristics. Each item is scored, and a total score of 12 or more indicates likely neuropathic pain. The tool is validated for use in clinical and postal research and does not require physical examination.
Method of Measurement:
Self-administered questionnaire completed by participants.
Measured: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
SF-MPQ
Description:
The SF-MPQ-2 is a patient-reported outcome measure used to assess the intensity and quality of pain across multiple dimensions. It includes 22 descriptors rated on an 11-point scale (0-10), covering continuous, intermittent, neuropathic, and affective pain. Scores are calculated for each category and as a total score. Higher scores indicate greater pain severity. The SF-MPQ-2 is validated for use in diverse pain populations and is sensitive to treatment-related changes.
Method of Measurement:
Self-administered questionnaire completed by participants.
Measured: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Peripheral nerve injury classification (PNI)
Clinical evidence of PNI will be determined with an assessment of strength and sensitivity of the 3 nerves (radial (anterior and posterior branches), median, ulnar).
Allodynia: On the healthy and affected side, the evaluator will apply a series of monofilaments.
Methodology: the patient will be seated with his eyes closed. We will start by applying the 4.17 monofilament on the healthy side and then increase to the 4.93 monofilament. The patient will have to answer yes or no if he feels pain. We will do the same on the affected side Hypoesthesia: On the healthy side and affected side, the evaluator will apply the following monofilaments: Radial nerve: 3.61,Median nerve: 3.22,Ulnar nerve: 3.22 Methodology: the patient will be seated with his eyes closed. If the patient does not feel pressure from the monofilament, the evaluator continues to increase the monofilament grades until the patient feels pressure.
Measured: Baseline, preop, immediatly after the procedure, 2 weeks, 3-6-12months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Dec 2025
- Study start1 Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2030 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (59)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Elbow DislocationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Université de Montréal
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dominique Rouleau, Université de Montréal
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07259382
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NERVE
- Acronym
- NERVE
- Status last verified
- Apr 2026
- First submitted
- 16 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 28 Apr 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Mahabier KC, Hartog DD, Van Veldhuizen J, Panneman MJ, Polinder S, Verhofstad MH, Van Lieshout EM. Trends in incidence rate, health care consumption, and costs for patients admitted with a humeral fracture in The Netherlands between 1986 and 2012. Injury. 2015 Oct;46(10):1930-7. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2015.07.025. Epub 2015 Aug 4.
PubMed 26296455Jodoin M, Rouleau DM, Therrien E, Chauny JM, Sandman E, Larson-Dupuis C, Leduc S, Gosselin N, De Beaumont L. Investigating the incidence and magnitude of heterotopic ossification with and without joints involvement in patients with a limb fracture and mild traumatic brain injury. Bone Rep. 2019 Aug 13;11:100222. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2019.100222. eCollection 2019 Dec.
PubMed 31463337Chapleau J, Canet F, Petit Y, Sandman E, Laflamme GY, Rouleau DM. Demographic and anthropometric factors affecting elbow range of motion in healthy adults. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Jan;22(1):88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.05.028. Epub 2012 Sep 1.
PubMed 22947233Rouleau DM, Sandman E, van Riet R, Galatz LM. Management of fractures of the proximal ulna. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013 Mar;21(3):149-60. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-21-03-149.
PubMed 23457065Thabane L, Lancaster G. A guide to the reporting of protocols of pilot and feasibility trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2019 Feb 28;5:37. doi: 10.1186/s40814-019-0423-8. eCollection 2019.
PubMed 30858987Zetterberg H, Blennow K. Fluid biomarkers for mild traumatic brain injury and related conditions. Nat Rev Neurol. 2016 Oct;12(10):563-74. doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2016.127. Epub 2016 Sep 16.
PubMed 27632903Niezgoda A, Michalak S, Losy J, Kalinowska-Lyszczarz A, Kozubski W. sNCAM as a specific marker of peripheral demyelination. Immunol Lett. 2017 May;185:93-97. doi: 10.1016/j.imlet.2017.03.011. Epub 2017 Mar 21.
PubMed 28336415Oh YM, Ma TZ, Kwak YG, Eun JP. Proteomic evaluation to identify biomarkers for carpal tunnel syndrome: a comparative serum analysis. Connect Tissue Res. 2013;54(1):76-81. doi: 10.3109/03008207.2012.746320. Epub 2012 Dec 3.
PubMed 23186247Michetti F, D'Ambrosi N, Toesca A, Puglisi MA, Serrano A, Marchese E, Corvino V, Geloso MC. The S100B story: from biomarker to active factor in neural injury. J Neurochem. 2019 Jan;148(2):168-187. doi: 10.1111/jnc.14574. Epub 2018 Nov 12.
PubMed 30144068Bergquist ER, Hammert WC. Timing and appropriate use of electrodiagnostic studies. Hand Clin. 2013 Aug;29(3):363-70. doi: 10.1016/j.hcl.2013.04.005. Epub 2013 Jun 12.
PubMed 23895716Seddon HJ. A Classification of Nerve Injuries. Br Med J. 1942 Aug 29;2(4260):237-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.4260.237. No abstract available.
PubMed 20784403Packham TL, Spicher CJ, MacDermid JC, Quintal I, Buckley N. Evaluating a sensitive issue: reliability of a clinical evaluation for allodynia severity. Somatosens Mot Res. 2020 Mar;37(1):22-27. doi: 10.1080/08990220.2019.1704242. Epub 2019 Dec 20.
PubMed 31858880Perez RS, Zollinger PE, Dijkstra PU, Thomassen-Hilgersom IL, Zuurmond WW, Rosenbrand KC, Geertzen JH; CRPS I task force. Evidence based guidelines for complex regional pain syndrome type 1. BMC Neurol. 2010 Mar 31;10:20. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-10-20.
PubMed 20356382Houdek MT, Shin AY. Management and complications of traumatic peripheral nerve injuries. Hand Clin. 2015 May;31(2):151-63. doi: 10.1016/j.hcl.2015.01.007. Epub 2015 Feb 28.
PubMed 25934193King NS, Crawford S, Wenden FJ, Moss NE, Wade DT. The Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire: a measure of symptoms commonly experienced after head injury and its reliability. J Neurol. 1995 Sep;242(9):587-92. doi: 10.1007/BF00868811.
PubMed 8551320
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Apr 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Neuro-Inflammation in Extremity Trauma: Risk Verification in Elbow Trauma: The NERVE Pilot Cohort Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07259382
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NERVE / NERVE
- Conditions
- Elbow Dislocation, Elbow Fractures, Inflammation Biomarkers, TBI Traumatic Brain Injury, Nerve Injury
- Keywords
- Biomarkers, Elbow fracture, elbow dislocation, Nerve injury, TBI
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 60 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Université de MontréalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2030 (estimated)
- First posted
- 2 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The primary goal of this proposal is to improve the understanding of the mechanisms causing persistent pain and disability in elbow fracture patients and their associated functional limitations. The specific objectives are as follows for elbow fractures:
- To describe NI mechanisms using biomarkers; 2) To identify factors related to increased NI biomarkers level; 3) To describe the associations between NI and outcomes; 4) To use these findings to refine a larger fully powered prognostic cohort study Hypotheses
- Level of neuro-inflammation (NI) biomarkers* will be significantly higher in patients presenting with both elbow fracture and CNS injury or PNI.
- Consumption of opioid in mg of morphine equivalent will be higher in patients with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Function, assessed by validated joint and limb specific functional questionnaires and QoL will be worse in patients with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Chronic pain at 3 months will be higher (McGill Pain questionnaire V2, Neuropathic pain questionnaire, NPRS) in patients with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Duration of tourniquet use and nerve dissection will be correlated to elbow fracture outcome with a higher level of NI biomarkers.
- Target biomarkers based on preliminary study will include, but not be limited to: TNFa, IL6, Substance P, IL-1B, TREM-2, IL-16, CCL22, VEGF-a, BMPs (table 1).
Detailed description
Chronic pain after limb fractures remains a challenging clinical problem although scientific and technological advances have made major contributions to improve patient outcomes. Nonetheless, even with an anatomical restoration of the bone architecture, many patients still have major functional limitations and persistent pain. This results in a work productivity loss. In the United States, upper limb injuries generate the highest direct and indirect costs (740M$), followed by lower limb fractures (562M$). Although outcomes following a fracture vary significantly, a "simple" fracture occurring at any time can become a turning point in the patient's life, where they can no longer achieve their pre-fracture functional status. The Canadian Pain Task Force estimates that 8 million Canadians suffer from chronic pain, costing $40 billion annually. This includes a large and understudied group of patients with post traumatic chronic pain, which occurs in up to 50% of patients following fractures. For these patients, opioids are meant to alleviate pain, but substance use disorder is a common problem. Indeed, approximately half of all patients with fractures have significant pain leading to persistent opioid intake 3 months post injury and 40% will suffer from a neuropathic type of pain, which is poorly controlled by medications. Opioid use is also associated with an increased sensitivity to pain (hyperalgesia) and patient dissatisfaction with injury outcome. Complications from prolonged opioid use are numerous, varying from constipation to overdose death. Canada is second worldwide, behind the United States, when it comes to opioid use and mortality. The majority of opioid dependant users were first exposed to opioids through medical prescriptions. This makes it imperative to improve the understanding of pain mechanisms to find alternative treatments to opioids in the management of these injuries.
In clinical practice, it is striking to see how two patients with a similar injury can exhibit completely opposite outcomes: one who has completely healed from the injury and the other with a stiff and painful joint. The reasons for these variations are unclear. A study have shown that only 3.3% of the differences in patient pain levels could be attributed to fracture severity. Given the enormous societal burden of limb injuries it is time for research to investigate the factors that contribute to the 97% of unexplained variability related to post fracture pain. The investigator working hypothesis is that the variability in post-fracture pain is caused by differences in expression of specific proinflammatory cytokines with nociceptive effects. This would explain why most studies strictly focusing on the orthopedic component of limb injury have yielded little improvement in preventing the adverse outcomes experienced by patients, namely chronic pain and loss of function.
Basic science studies have shown that in chronic pain cases, the resolution process following initial inflammation is deficient, leading to an excessive inflammatory response spreading throughout the nervous system long after the injury. This response, globally referred to as neuroinflammation (NI), has been associated with central sensitization, central nervous system (CNS) hyperactivity, allodynia and hyperalgesia. Surprisingly, NI is hardly studied in acute fracture cases, which is shocking given that it could explain chronic pain and disability. Also, some surgical factors may increase peripheral nerve injury (PNI).
Among all upper limb fractures, elbow trauma is the injury most frequently associated with a severe impact on patient function and quality of life. One of the main causes for poor outcomes is the complexity of the elbow joint, which involves three bones and two planes of motion, essential to the position of the hand in space. The flexion extension axis is crucial for eating and hygiene, while forearm pro-supination is mandatory for most professions, from office work to manual labour. Following surgical treatment of an elbow fracture, patients often present with complications, even with adequate bone healing. Indeed, one third of patients complain of ulnar nerve symptoms after distal humerus fracture fixation, and 50% of patients treated surgically for elbow fracture-dislocations will have disabling stiffness and chronic pain. The elbow is ideal to study neuroinflammation and pain as it involves 3 major nerves close to the joint: the radial, ulnar and median nerves. Elbow injury also has a high incidence of associated mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) and peripheral nerve injury (PNI), 20% and 15% respectively.
1.2 Neuroinflammation Neuroinflammation (NI) can take different forms: central and peripheral. Prevouis investigator's results showed that 23.5% of isolated limb injuries also exhibit a mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). More specifically, the investigators reported that 20% of ambulatory patients with an elbow fracture have a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Previous studies done by the investigator's team showed that outcomes of patients with a TBI, even mTBI, and a fracture is much poorer, compared to a group of similar patients without TBI, causing a work cessation three time longer (averaging 299 days versus 105 days). Central NI alters acute pain and increases the risk of chronic pain following a limb injury. At the time of brain trauma, brain-resident cells, such as microglia, will produce cytokines and other inflammatory mediators that spread through the peripheral circulatory system causing hypersensitivity and peripheral pain. Damage to the blood-brain barrier (BBB) following traumatic injury, allows circulating peripheral immune cells, produced in response to the fracture and present in high numbers at the site of injury and in immune organs, and the released cytokines to reach the brain and create a hyperactive inflammatory state. Astrocytes and endothelial cells also play a key role in this phenomenon. Importantly, research on US military veterans with orthopaedic injuries has revealed that the presence of mTBI significantly increases the risk of chronic pain and NI, as measured by higher levels of TNF and IL-6. A recent article in Nature also reported that the combined impact of mTBI and fracture to the brain could be permanent, because of the brain's immune memory. Therefore, both the traumatized brain and the fractured limb will evolve more poorly than if each lesion had occurred independently.
There is a spectrum of PNI that can occur at the time of the fracture or during their surgical treatment. It is estimated that these lesions affect between 3% and 10% of trauma extremity patients. In the elbow, certain types of injuries have a much higher rate of PNI; up to 30%. The most benign are called neuropraxia and consist of segmental demyelination. The symptoms include numbness and weakness for a period ranging from a few days to a few weeks. Axonotmesis is a rupture of the axons while the nerve sheath remains intact. Spontaneous healing is possible but will take months. Severe lesions consist in a complete nerve rupture, called neurotmesis. This is rare and requires surgical treatment. The precise incidence of neuropraxia is unknown, because pain following a trauma often hides neurological injury symptoms that heal on their own. These transient lesions contribute to the chronic pain mechanisms, which often lead to persistent opioid consumption.
Neuroinflammation can be the result of an altered, uncontrolled immune response to the peripheral injury. Proinflammatory cytokines such as TNF, IL-1, and IL-6 are rapidly produced after injury, and sometimes expressed for prolonged periods of time if there is no resolution of inflammation solve. Importantly, these proinflammatory cytokines play a major role in the transition from acute to chronic pain, acting as potent mediators of excitatory activity in the CNS through modulation of the glutaminergic system. This increase in excitatory activity also decreases the gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) activity, which further affects CNS homeostasis. Neuroinflammation markers consequently increase in the circulatory system. Preliminary experiments in patients with fractures found a strong correlation between plasma levels of proinflammatory cytokines, as well as some less frequently studied biomarkers such as C1qA, and chronic pain. Notably, the C1qA protein was involved in the development of neuropathic pain in animal models and showed variations related to the sex of rodents. In an ongoing study, the investigators demonstrated that NI biomarkers played a role in pain and outcome after human fracture, including TREM2, IL16, CCL22, VEGF-a (appendix), amongst others.
1.3 Surgical factors A literature review shows that tourniquet use and nerve dissection may play a role in elbow surgery outcome. While a tourniquet is often used to avoid bleeding and give better visibility, the tourniquet causes an inflammatory ischemia/reperfusion reaction. Several studies have shown an impact of the tourniquet on pain in lower limb surgery. Using a tourniquet to treat ankle fractures is associated with a greater consumption of opioids for the first 24 hours and more pain at 5 days and 6 weeks post-surgery. Tourniquet duration was also correlated with increased opioid consumption in a Danish study on 603 patients; patients took 0,43 mg more morphine for each additional 10 minutes with the tourniquet. Furthermore, British Medical Council Neurology guidelines for tourniquet use report an increased risk of complex regional pain syndrome in surgeries with a tourniquet. Peripheral nerve ischemia during tourniquet use, for up to 120 minutes, could promote NI. However, there is a lack of data specific to elbow surgery and tourniquet use, as reported by a meta-analysis. Surgical nerve dissection may also cause peripheral nerve inflammation. A recent systematic review of elbow fractures reported that ulnar nerve transposition is related to more chronic symptoms than nerve identification only. The quality of the articles involved in the review was modest and electromyography (EMG) was not used to measure impairment.
In summary, limb fractures are associated with a high risk of sequelae, even with proper healing of osseous and ligamentous components. Pain and disability leading to chronic opioid intake is a major concern. Elbow joint fractures are an excellent subgroup to study this phenomenon because of the high incidence of concomitant central and peripheral neurological injuries. Moreover, having a homogenous patient group will make it easier to compare functional outcomes with joint specific questionnaires and functional evaluation. The Nerve pilot study is well supported by the basic science literature and designed to study the mechanisms leading to neuro-inflammation in injured human patients, with the long-term goal of understanding factors increasing NI (e.g., concomitant head injury, peripheral nerve injury, surgical factors, demographic characteristics) and its consequences (e.g., acute and chronic pain, disability). It is expected that studying the surgical factors that increase NI will allow surgeons to choose different therapeutic options.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Elbow fracture | – | Other: Biomarkers evaluationPatient with an acute, isolated elbow fracture |
| Elbow fracture and peripheral nerve injury | – | Other: Biomarkers evaluationPatient with an acute elbow fracture and a peripheral nerve injury |
| Ebow fracture and TBI | – | Other: Biomarkers evaluationPatient with an acute elbow fracture and a mild TBI |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patient with an acute elbow surgery with an appointment at the Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Adults 18 years or older with an acute elbow fracture and/or dislocation less than a week old
- Open surgery as the chosen treatment
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Patient with a history of ipsilateral upper limb trauma or pathology, neurological disorder.
- Patient unable to answer questionnaires.
- Patient unavailable for a one-year follow-up, for example from another country.
- Patient with vascular injury or open fracture
- Patient with an active inflammatory disease (ex: rheumatoid arthritis)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Biomarkers evaluationParticipants will undergo blood test that evaluate several inflammatory biomarkers before and after the surgery | Other | Ebow fracture and TBI, Elbow fracture, Elbow fracture and peripheral nerve injury |
Primary outcome
Biomarkers
Time frame: Baseline, preoperative, perioperative, immediatly after the intervention, 3months
Five blood samples per subject will be taken at selected intervals to measure the serum levels of the targeted pro-inflammatory cytokines for the 60 selected patients. A blood sample will be collected at the first appointment before surgery. Preoperative and postoperative blood samples will also be collected in the operating room. The first will be taken before skin asepsis and the second will be taken immediately after application of the final wound dressing. Blood from the fracture site (hematoma) will also be collected when possible. The fifth blood sample will be collected at 3 months of follow up. Samples will be stored in a -70°C freezer in each city and sent every 6 months for analysis to Olink, Montreal. Group dosage will be performed for the NI factors and circulating proteins (e.g. cytokines, chemokines, neuropeptides), such as TNF, IL-1, IL-6, IL-16, osteopontin, S100B, NSE, GFAP, Substance P, TREM-2, CCL22, and BMPs.
10 secondary outcomes
PREE
Time frame: Baseline, preop, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Range of motion
Time frame: Baseline, preop, immediatly after the procedure, 2 weeks, 3-6-12months
Pain assessment
Time frame: Baseline, preop, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Opioïds consumption
Time frame: Recorded once per day from baseline through 12months
Quick-DASH
Time frame: Baseline, preop, 2weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months
EQ-5D-5L
Time frame: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Rivermead
Time frame: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
S-LANSS
Time frame: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
SF-MPQ
Time frame: Baseline, pre-op, 2 weeks, 3-6-12 months
Peripheral nerve injury classification (PNI)
Time frame: Baseline, preop, immediatly after the procedure, 2 weeks, 3-6-12months
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Apr 2026.
- Background: PubMed 26296455Mahabier KC, Hartog DD, Van Veldhuizen J, Panneman MJ, Polinder S, Verhofstad MH, Van Lieshout EM. Trends in incidence rate, health care consumption, and costs for patients admitted with a humeral fracture in The Netherlands between 1986 and 2012. Injury. 2015 Oct;46(10):1930-7. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2015.07.025. Epub 2015 Aug 4.
- Results publication: PubMed 31463337Jodoin M, Rouleau DM, Therrien E, Chauny JM, Sandman E, Larson-Dupuis C, Leduc S, Gosselin N, De Beaumont L. Investigating the incidence and magnitude of heterotopic ossification with and without joints involvement in patients with a limb fracture and mild traumatic brain injury. Bone Rep. 2019 Aug 13;11:100222. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2019.100222. eCollection 2019 Dec.
- Results publication: PubMed 22947233Chapleau J, Canet F, Petit Y, Sandman E, Laflamme GY, Rouleau DM. Demographic and anthropometric factors affecting elbow range of motion in healthy adults. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Jan;22(1):88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.05.028. Epub 2012 Sep 1.
- Results publication: PubMed 23457065Rouleau DM, Sandman E, van Riet R, Galatz LM. Management of fractures of the proximal ulna. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013 Mar;21(3):149-60. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-21-03-149.
- Results publication: PubMed 30858987Thabane L, Lancaster G. A guide to the reporting of protocols of pilot and feasibility trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2019 Feb 28;5:37. doi: 10.1186/s40814-019-0423-8. eCollection 2019.
- Results publication: PubMed 27632903Zetterberg H, Blennow K. Fluid biomarkers for mild traumatic brain injury and related conditions. Nat Rev Neurol. 2016 Oct;12(10):563-74. doi: 10.1038/nrneurol.2016.127. Epub 2016 Sep 16.
- Results publication: PubMed 28336415Niezgoda A, Michalak S, Losy J, Kalinowska-Lyszczarz A, Kozubski W. sNCAM as a specific marker of peripheral demyelination. Immunol Lett. 2017 May;185:93-97. doi: 10.1016/j.imlet.2017.03.011. Epub 2017 Mar 21.
- Results publication: PubMed 23186247Oh YM, Ma TZ, Kwak YG, Eun JP. Proteomic evaluation to identify biomarkers for carpal tunnel syndrome: a comparative serum analysis. Connect Tissue Res. 2013;54(1):76-81. doi: 10.3109/03008207.2012.746320. Epub 2012 Dec 3.
- Results publication: PubMed 30144068Michetti F, D'Ambrosi N, Toesca A, Puglisi MA, Serrano A, Marchese E, Corvino V, Geloso MC. The S100B story: from biomarker to active factor in neural injury. J Neurochem. 2019 Jan;148(2):168-187. doi: 10.1111/jnc.14574. Epub 2018 Nov 12.
- Results publication: PubMed 23895716Bergquist ER, Hammert WC. Timing and appropriate use of electrodiagnostic studies. Hand Clin. 2013 Aug;29(3):363-70. doi: 10.1016/j.hcl.2013.04.005. Epub 2013 Jun 12.
- Results publication: PubMed 20784403Seddon HJ. A Classification of Nerve Injuries. Br Med J. 1942 Aug 29;2(4260):237-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.2.4260.237. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 31858880Packham TL, Spicher CJ, MacDermid JC, Quintal I, Buckley N. Evaluating a sensitive issue: reliability of a clinical evaluation for allodynia severity. Somatosens Mot Res. 2020 Mar;37(1):22-27. doi: 10.1080/08990220.2019.1704242. Epub 2019 Dec 20.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Elbow Dislocation
Active, not recruiting
RHEVOLUTION Clinical Trial: Use of Two Radial Head Arthroplasty Designs for the Treatment of Elbow Instability
Elbow Arthropathy, Elbow Dislocation
Recruiting
The Utilization of Ultrasound to Diagnose Pediatric Elbow Fractures
Elbow Pain, Supracondylar Humerus Fracture
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Elbow Dislocation and Elbow Fractures, run by Université de Montréal.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Dominique Rouleau, MD, MSc (514-338-2222, dominique_rouleau@yahoo.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Biomarkers (time frame: Baseline, preoperative, perioperative, immediatly after the intervention, 3months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07259382, which also lists 59 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Apr 2026.