Pain ManagementNAP-C/RNCT07416448
Neuroma-Associated Pain Management After Combat-Related Trauma in Ukraine
A study testing cryoablation and Radiofrequency ablation alone in people with Pain Management and Quality of Life, run by Ukrainian Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Therapy at 1 site in Ukraine.
Trial summary
This multicenter interventional study in Ukraine is designed to compare the effectiveness of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation in managing neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain Management, Quality of Life, Neuroma
- What is being tested?
- cryoablation and Radiofrequency ablation alone
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUkraine
- Study dates
- 5 Feb 2026to 5 Feb 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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
Who may be able to join
- Age 18 years or older
- Sustained combat-related trauma
- Clinically significant neuroma-associated pain localized to a peripheral nerve or neuroma
- Moderate to severe pain (score ≥ 4 on a standardized numeric pain rating scale)
- Medically stable and able to undergo a percutaneous interventional procedure
- Able to understand and provide written informed consent
Show all 9Show fewer
- Willing and able to comply with study procedures, including follow-up assessments and patient-reported outcome measures
- May be receiving standard analgesic therapy, including opioids, if usage can be monitored
- No planned surgical intervention at the neuroma site during the study period that could interfere with pain assessment
Who cannot join
- Age under 18 years
- Pregnant or breastfeeding
- Severe uncontrolled medical comorbidities that preclude safe participation
- Active infection at or near the proposed intervention site
- Known coagulopathy or use of anticoagulants that cannot be safely withheld
- Previous cryoablation or radiofrequency ablation at the target neuroma within the past 6 months
Show all 9Show fewer
- Inability to provide informed consent or comply with study procedures
- Participation in another interventional clinical trial that could interfere with study outcomes
- Known allergy or intolerance to materials used during the procedures
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Ukraine1 site
Communal enterprise "Yuri Semenyuk Rivne Regional Clinical Hospital" of Rivne Regional Council
Rivne, 33003
About this study
Official title: Comprehensive Multicenter Study on the Management of Neuroma-Associated Pain Following Combat-Related Trauma in Ukraine
This multicenter interventional study in Ukraine is designed to compare the effectiveness of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation in managing neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma. Adult patients with clinically significant neuropathic pain caused by neuromas will be randomly assigned to receive either image-guided cryoablation or radiofrequency ablation of the affected nerve. Cryoablation uses controlled cold temperatures to temporarily disrupt nerve conduction, while radiofrequency ablation uses thermal energy to modulate nerve function. Both interventions are minimally invasive and performed under image guidance. The study will evaluate changes in pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures at predefined time points following the procedure. This research aims to provide evidence on which intervention is more effective in reducing pain, improving function, and minimizing the need for opioid medications in patients with combat-related neuroma pain.
Read the detailed description
This multicenter interventional study is designed to compare the safety and effectiveness of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation in the management of neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma in adult patients treated at tertiary care centers in Vinnytsia, Rivne, and Lviv, Ukraine. Neuroma-associated pain is a neuropathic pain condition that often develops after peripheral nerve injury and is characterized by chronic or acute pain that can severely limit function, reduce quality of life, and increase reliance on opioid and other analgesic medications. Despite advances in pain management, there is limited high-quality comparative evidence regarding the relative benefits and risks of cryoablation versus radiofrequency ablation for acute and subacute neuroma pain, particularly in patients recovering from combat-related trauma.
Cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation are minimally invasive, image-guided procedures that target peripheral nerves to reduce or block pain signal transmission. Cryoablation involves the application of extremely low temperatures to the neuroma or affected nerve, producing a temporary and reversible interruption of nerve conduction while preserving overall nerve structure. Radiofrequency ablation delivers controlled thermal energy to the target nerve, modulating nerve function and reducing pain signaling. Both interventions are performed percutaneously under image guidance, and the number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the anatomical distribution of the neuroma and clinical assessment. These interventions are delivered in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy according to institutional protocols.
The study adopts a randomized, parallel assignment design. Eligible adult patients presenting with neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma are randomized to receive either cryoablation or radiofrequency ablation. Pain intensity is measured using validated scales at baseline and at predefined follow-up time points to capture both immediate and short-term effects of each intervention. Opioid and other analgesic use is recorded and standardized to allow comparisons between treatment arms. Pulmonary and functional measures, including incentive spirometry and pain provoked by movement or specific activities, are assessed where clinically relevant to evaluate the functional impact of pain reduction. Mechanical sensitivity of the affected area is measured using Von Frey testing to provide objective assessment of nociceptive changes. Patient-reported outcomes, including the LANS scale for neuropathic pain characteristics, the McGill Pain Questionnaire for qualitative pain assessment, and the PHQ-9 for depressive symptoms, are also collected to assess the multidimensional impact of pain and the effect of interventions on overall well-being.
Demographic, clinical, and procedural variables are collected, including age, sex, body mass index, baseline pain intensity, neuroma location, and the number of nerve levels treated. These data allow for exploratory and adjusted analyses to identify factors associated with treatment response and clinically meaningful pain reduction. Data are entered into standardized electronic case report forms to ensure consistency and data quality across all participating centers.
Safety monitoring is conducted throughout the study period. Both cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation are performed by clinicians experienced in interventional pain management, following established procedural safety protocols. Adverse events, including procedural complications and clinically significant changes in neurological function, are systematically documented and reviewed. The primary focus of safety assessment is on immediate and short-term complications related to the interventions, while longer-term follow-up may include monitoring for delayed adverse events associated with nerve-targeting procedures.
The study is expected to generate clinically relevant evidence comparing the analgesic efficacy, functional impact, opioid-sparing potential, and safety profile of cryoablation versus radiofrequency ablation for neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma. Results will provide guidance for clinicians in selecting appropriate interventions for this patient population, support evidence-based pain management strategies, and contribute to improving patient outcomes by optimizing functional recovery and minimizing reliance on systemic analgesics.
- Conditions
- Pain Management, Quality of Life, Neuroma, Functional Outcome, Depression in Adults, Neuropathic Pain
- Being tested
- cryoablation, Radiofrequency ablation alone
- Keywords
- Neuroma Pain, Combat-Related Trauma, Cryoablation, Radiofrequency Ablation, Neuropathic Pain
- Medical subject headings
- Agnosia, Neuroma, Neuralgia, Hypesthesia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
cryoablationProcedure or surgery
Participants in this arm will receive image-guided cryoablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous application of controlled low temperatures to temporarily interrupt nerve conduction while preserving overall nerve structure. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Cryoablation is performed in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety.
Radiofrequency ablation aloneProcedure or surgery
Participants in this arm will receive image-guided radiofrequency ablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous delivery of controlled thermal energy to modulate nerve function and reduce pain signal transmission. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Radiofrequency ablation is administered in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Cryoablation | Active comparator | Participants in this arm will receive image-guided cryoablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous application of controlled low temperatures to temporarily interrupt nerve conduction while preserving overall nerve structure. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Cryoablation is performed in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety. Receives: Procedure: Radiofrequency ablation alone |
| Radiofrequency Ablation | Active comparator | Participants in this arm will receive image-guided radiofrequency ablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous delivery of controlled thermal energy to modulate nerve function and reduce pain signal transmission. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Radiofrequency ablation is administered in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety. Receives: Procedure: cryoablation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Pain Intensity Measured by Verbal Numeric Rating Scale (VNRS)
Pain intensity is assessed using the Verbal Numeric Rating Scale (VNRS), a validated 11-point scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates "no pain" and 10 indicates "worst imaginable pain." Higher scores indicate greater pain intensity. Change in pain intensity is evaluated by comparing VNRS scores across predefined time points.
Measured: 4, 24, and 72 hours post-procedure.
Secondary outcomes (11)
Mechanical pain threshold
Assess mechanical pain threshold changes using Von Frey test
Measured: Before and 72 hours after
Opioid consumption
Compare opioid consumption
Measured: before and 72 hours after ablation
Evaluate quality of life and functional outcomes with Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs LANS
Quality of life and functional outcomes were evaluated using the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) pain scale. LANSS is a validated instrument designed to identify and quantify neuropathic pain and its functional impact. The scale consists of symptom-based questions and sensory examination items, with a total score ranging from 0 to 24. A score of 0 indicates no neuropathic pain features, while a score of 24 indicates the maximum severity of neuropathic pain features. Higher LANSS scores reflect greater neuropathic pain burden, increased functional impairment, and poorer quality of life, representing a worse outcome. Changes in LANSS scores were assessed over the study period to evaluate treatment-related effects.
Measured: 6 month after
Quality of life and functional outcomes were evaluated using the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ)
Quality of life and functional outcomes were evaluated using the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), a validated multidimensional instrument assessing the sensory, affective, and evaluative components of pain and their impact on daily functioning. The total Pain Rating Index (PRI) derived from the MPQ ranges from 0 to 78, where 0 indicates no pain-related impact and 78 indicates the maximum pain-related impact. Higher scores represent greater pain intensity and functional impairment, corresponding to poorer quality of life and a worse outcome. Changes in MPQ scores were assessed over the study period to evaluate treatment-related effects.
Measured: 6 mounth
Quality of life and functional outcomes were evaluated using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)
Quality of life and functional outcomes were evaluated using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), a validated self-reported instrument used to assess the severity of depressive symptoms and their impact on daily functioning and overall quality of life. The PHQ-9 total score ranges from 0 to 27, where 0 indicates no depressive symptoms and 27 indicates severe depressive symptoms. Higher scores represent greater symptom severity, increased functional impairment, and poorer quality of life, corresponding to a worse outcome. Changes in PHQ-9 scores were assessed over the study period to evaluate treatment-related effects.
Measured: 6 mounth
Change in Functional Mobility Measured by Goniometric Range of Motion and Functional Activity Scale
Functional mobility is assessed by measuring active range of motion of the affected region using a standard clinical goniometer (degrees of movement) and by recording performance on a standardized functional activity scale (0-10 numeric rating of activity limitation). Higher goniometric values indicate greater range of motion, and higher functional activity scores indicate greater activity limitation. Change in functional mobility is evaluated by comparing measurements obtained at baseline and predefined post-procedure time points.
Measured: Baseline and 72 hours post-procedure
Change in Sleep Quality Measured by Numeric Rating Scale
Sleep quality is assessed using a Sleep Quality Numeric Rating Scale, an 11-point scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates "worst possible sleep quality" and 10 indicates "best possible sleep quality." Higher scores indicate better sleep quality. Change in sleep quality is evaluated by comparing scores obtained at baseline and predefined post-procedure time points.
Measured: Baseline and 72 hours post-procedure
Patient Global Impression of Change Score
Patient status is assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Change scale, a standardized 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates "very much worse," 4 indicates "no change," and 7 indicates "very much improved." Higher scores indicate greater perceived improvement. Scores obtained at predefined post-procedure time points are recorded and analyzed to characterize patient-reported global status following intervention.
Measured: 72 hours post-procedure
Local Procedure Site Reaction / Adverse Events
Documentation of local complications such as bruising, swelling, soreness, or sensory changes at the site of nerve intervention to assess procedural safety.
Measured: Immediate post-procedure and 72 hours
Time to First Rescue Analgesic
Time from procedure to first use of additional analgesics (other than baseline opioids) to evaluate the duration of pain relief provided by each intervention.
Measured: Up to 72 hours post-procedure
Change in Functional Pain Interference Measured by Brief Pain Inventory Interference Scale
Functional impact of pain is assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory Interference Scale, a validated patient-reported outcome measure consisting of seven items evaluating pain interference with general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with others, sleep, and enjoyment of life. Each item is scored on an 11-point numeric scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates "does not interfere" and 10 indicates "completely interferes." Higher scores indicate greater pain-related interference. Change in functional pain interference is evaluated by comparing scores obtained at baseline and predefined post-procedure time points.
Measured: Baseline and 72 hours post-procedure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Feb 2026
- Study start5 Feb 2026
- Primary completion5 Feb 2026
- Study completion5 Feb 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pain ManagementStudies 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
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Ukrainian Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Therapy
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07416448
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CMS-NAP-UA
- Acronym
- NAP-C/R
- Status last verified
- Oct 2026
- First submitted
- 4 Feb 2026
- Last updated
- 19 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Dmytriiev D, Liu W, Barsa M, Khomenko A, Strokan A, Pasquina PF, Cohen SP. Perineuromal hydrodissection for acute postamputation pain? An observational study in a time of war. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2026 Jul 6;51(7):795-804. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2024-106307.
PubMed 39971386
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comprehensive Multicenter Study on the Management of Neuroma-Associated Pain Following Combat-Related Trauma in Ukraine
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07416448
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NAP-C/R / CMS-NAP-UA
- Conditions
- Pain Management, Quality of Life, Neuroma, Functional Outcome, Depression in Adults, Neuropathic Pain
- Keywords
- Neuroma Pain, Combat-Related Trauma, Cryoablation, Radiofrequency Ablation, Neuropathic Pain
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Ukrainian Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain TherapyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 5 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 5 Feb 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 5 Feb 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Feb 2026 (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.
This multicenter interventional study in Ukraine is designed to compare the effectiveness of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation in managing neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma. Adult patients with clinically significant neuropathic pain caused by neuromas will be randomly assigned to receive either image-guided cryoablation or radiofrequency ablation of the affected nerve. Cryoablation uses controlled cold temperatures to temporarily disrupt nerve conduction, while radiofrequency ablation uses thermal energy to modulate nerve function. Both interventions are minimally invasive and performed under image guidance. The study will evaluate changes in pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures at predefined time points following the procedure. This research aims to provide evidence on which intervention is more effective in reducing pain, improving function, and minimizing the need for opioid medications in patients with combat-related neuroma pain.
Detailed description
This multicenter interventional study is designed to compare the safety and effectiveness of cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation in the management of neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma in adult patients treated at tertiary care centers in Vinnytsia, Rivne, and Lviv, Ukraine. Neuroma-associated pain is a neuropathic pain condition that often develops after peripheral nerve injury and is characterized by chronic or acute pain that can severely limit function, reduce quality of life, and increase reliance on opioid and other analgesic medications. Despite advances in pain management, there is limited high-quality comparative evidence regarding the relative benefits and risks of cryoablation versus radiofrequency ablation for acute and subacute neuroma pain, particularly in patients recovering from combat-related trauma.
Cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation are minimally invasive, image-guided procedures that target peripheral nerves to reduce or block pain signal transmission. Cryoablation involves the application of extremely low temperatures to the neuroma or affected nerve, producing a temporary and reversible interruption of nerve conduction while preserving overall nerve structure. Radiofrequency ablation delivers controlled thermal energy to the target nerve, modulating nerve function and reducing pain signaling. Both interventions are performed percutaneously under image guidance, and the number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the anatomical distribution of the neuroma and clinical assessment. These interventions are delivered in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy according to institutional protocols.
The study adopts a randomized, parallel assignment design. Eligible adult patients presenting with neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma are randomized to receive either cryoablation or radiofrequency ablation. Pain intensity is measured using validated scales at baseline and at predefined follow-up time points to capture both immediate and short-term effects of each intervention. Opioid and other analgesic use is recorded and standardized to allow comparisons between treatment arms. Pulmonary and functional measures, including incentive spirometry and pain provoked by movement or specific activities, are assessed where clinically relevant to evaluate the functional impact of pain reduction. Mechanical sensitivity of the affected area is measured using Von Frey testing to provide objective assessment of nociceptive changes. Patient-reported outcomes, including the LANS scale for neuropathic pain characteristics, the McGill Pain Questionnaire for qualitative pain assessment, and the PHQ-9 for depressive symptoms, are also collected to assess the multidimensional impact of pain and the effect of interventions on overall well-being.
Demographic, clinical, and procedural variables are collected, including age, sex, body mass index, baseline pain intensity, neuroma location, and the number of nerve levels treated. These data allow for exploratory and adjusted analyses to identify factors associated with treatment response and clinically meaningful pain reduction. Data are entered into standardized electronic case report forms to ensure consistency and data quality across all participating centers.
Safety monitoring is conducted throughout the study period. Both cryoablation and radiofrequency ablation are performed by clinicians experienced in interventional pain management, following established procedural safety protocols. Adverse events, including procedural complications and clinically significant changes in neurological function, are systematically documented and reviewed. The primary focus of safety assessment is on immediate and short-term complications related to the interventions, while longer-term follow-up may include monitoring for delayed adverse events associated with nerve-targeting procedures.
The study is expected to generate clinically relevant evidence comparing the analgesic efficacy, functional impact, opioid-sparing potential, and safety profile of cryoablation versus radiofrequency ablation for neuroma-associated pain following combat-related trauma. Results will provide guidance for clinicians in selecting appropriate interventions for this patient population, support evidence-based pain management strategies, and contribute to improving patient outcomes by optimizing functional recovery and minimizing reliance on systemic analgesics.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Cryoablation | Active comparator | Procedure: Radiofrequency ablation aloneParticipants in this arm will receive image-guided cryoablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous application of controlled low temperatures to temporarily interrupt nerve conduction while preserving overall nerve structure. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Cryoablation is performed in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety. |
| Radiofrequency Ablation | Active comparator | Procedure: cryoablationParticipants in this arm will receive image-guided radiofrequency ablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous delivery of controlled thermal energy to modulate nerve function and reduce pain signal transmission. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Radiofrequency ablation is administered in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Age 18 years or older
- Sustained combat-related trauma
- Clinically significant neuroma-associated pain localized to a peripheral nerve or neuroma
- Moderate to severe pain (score ≥ 4 on a standardized numeric pain rating scale)
- Medically stable and able to undergo a percutaneous interventional procedure
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Age under 18 years
- Pregnant or breastfeeding
- Severe uncontrolled medical comorbidities that preclude safe participation
- Active infection at or near the proposed intervention site
- Known coagulopathy or use of anticoagulants that cannot be safely withheld
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 |
|---|---|---|
| cryoablationParticipants in this arm will receive image-guided cryoablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous application of controlled low temperatures to temporarily interrupt nerve conduction while preserving overall nerve structure. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Cryoablation is performed in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety. | Procedure or surgery | Radiofrequency Ablation |
| Radiofrequency ablation aloneParticipants in this arm will receive image-guided radiofrequency ablation of the neuroma or affected peripheral nerve. The procedure involves percutaneous delivery of controlled thermal energy to modulate nerve function and reduce pain signal transmission. The number of treated nerve levels is determined based on the location and extent of the neuroma. Radiofrequency ablation is administered in addition to standard trauma care and supportive therapy. Pain intensity, opioid consumption, functional outcomes, and patient-reported measures will be recorded before and after the procedure to evaluate efficacy and safety. | Procedure or surgery | Cryoablation |
Primary outcome
Change in Pain Intensity Measured by Verbal Numeric Rating Scale (VNRS)
Time frame: 4, 24, and 72 hours post-procedure.
Pain intensity is assessed using the Verbal Numeric Rating Scale (VNRS), a validated 11-point scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates "no pain" and 10 indicates "worst imaginable pain." Higher scores indicate greater pain intensity. Change in pain intensity is evaluated by comparing VNRS scores across predefined time points.
11 secondary outcomes
Mechanical pain threshold
Time frame: Before and 72 hours after
Opioid consumption
Time frame: before and 72 hours after ablation
Evaluate quality of life and functional outcomes with Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs LANS
Time frame: 6 month after
Quality of life and functional outcomes were evaluated using the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ)
Time frame: 6 mounth
Quality of life and functional outcomes were evaluated using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)
Time frame: 6 mounth
Change in Functional Mobility Measured by Goniometric Range of Motion and Functional Activity Scale
Time frame: Baseline and 72 hours post-procedure
Change in Sleep Quality Measured by Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Baseline and 72 hours post-procedure
Patient Global Impression of Change Score
Time frame: 72 hours post-procedure
Local Procedure Site Reaction / Adverse Events
Time frame: Immediate post-procedure and 72 hours
Time to First Rescue Analgesic
Time frame: Up to 72 hours post-procedure
Change in Functional Pain Interference Measured by Brief Pain Inventory Interference Scale
Time frame: Baseline and 72 hours post-procedure
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Oct 2026.
- Results publication: PubMed 39971386Dmytriiev D, Liu W, Barsa M, Khomenko A, Strokan A, Pasquina PF, Cohen SP. Perineuromal hydrodissection for acute postamputation pain? An observational study in a time of war. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2026 Jul 6;51(7):795-804. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2024-106307.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Pain Management
RecruitingPhase 4
ESP Blocks for Posterior Spinal Fusion
Postoperative Pain
Not yet recruiting
Comparing Non-Medicine Strategies for Improving Low Back Pain
Chronic Low-back Pain (cLBP), High-Impact Chronic Pain (HICP)
Active, not recruiting
Efficacy of Laparoscopic-Assisted TAP Block in Laparoscopic Appendectomy
Appendectomy, Laparoscopic, Blockades Neuromuscular
Recruiting
Photobiomodulation for Management of Temporomandibular Disorder Pain
Pain Related to TMD
Recruiting
SIRI Levels Following PENG Block in Pediatric Hip Surgery
Hip Dysplasia
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. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing cryoablation and Radiofrequency ablation alone in people with Pain Management and Quality of Life, run by Ukrainian Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Therapy at 1 site in Ukraine.
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 9 inclusion and 9 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 19 Oct 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Ukraine. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Pain Intensity Measured by Verbal Numeric Rating Scale (VNRS) (time frame: 4, 24, and 72 hours post-procedure.). 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 NCT07416448, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 19 Oct 2026.