The Evolution of TMR Utilization: A 23-Year Journey from Exploratory Upper Extremity Prosthesis Control to Standard of Care for Major Amputations and Pain Management
- 1Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
- 2Department of Orthopedics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
- 3Shirley Ryan AbilityLab, Center for Bionic Medicine, 355 E Erie St, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
Abstract
Background: Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) has become increasingly utilized beyond advanced myoelectric control to treat and prevent neuropathic pain. This study aims to evaluate changes in practice patterns in TMR utilization. Methods: A single-center, retrospective review was conducted for TMR procedures from 2002 to 2025 using CPT codes and publications. Case volumes were analyzed by major amputation level, timing, and for patients without amputation. A bibliographic analysis from 2004 to 2025 was then conducted to model corresponding research activity. Trends were analyzed using negative binomial regression and logistic regression with α = 0.05. Results: A total of 569 TMR cases were analyzed, including 145 below-knee amputations, 72 above-knee, 102 major upper extremity amputations, and 159 cases for chronic pain in non-amputees. For all-cause indications, there were 196 acute and 373 delayed procedures. Annual TMR volume increased most rapidly from 2016 to 2019, corresponding to new chronic pain applications. Lower extremity cases became and remained more prevalent in 2017, and acute cases became more common in 2025. The proportion of acute TMR cases increased 20% per year (p < 0.001), and the odds of receiving acute TMR for a major amputation increased by 17% per year (p < 0.001). When stratifying by timing for amputation-related cases only, all-cause, limb-specific reoperation was more frequent after acute TMR versus delayed (33/124 (26.6%) vs. 31/192 (16.1%); p = 0.031) with no difference in nerve-specific reoperation (p = 0.25). Notably, on average, only 15% of major amputations received acute TMR from 2021 to 2025. Publishing activity for TMR most rapidly increased from 2018 to 2020. Conclusions: TMR experienced a rapid evolution in both technique and indications through the late 2010s, mirrored by the published literature. Buy-in from referring surgeons is critical to performing acute TMR, which has been demonstrated to have superior outcomes, but careful consideration must be given to mitigate surgical site complications in this population.
Related
- Oral rehydration salts utilization in pediatric diarrhea management among Chinese pediatricians: a national survey
- War-related limb amputations among soldiers in the Democratic Republic of Congo: a descriptive case series study
- Outcomes of simultaneous microsurgical replantation of complete amputations at the distal third of the right forearm and left wrist: a case report and 22-month follow-up
- Community Awareness, Utilization, and Factors Influencing the Use of Over-the-Counter Scar Management Products: A Cross-Sectional Survey
- HEALTHCARE RESOURCE UTILIZATION IN THE MANAGEMENT OF CHRONIC GRAFT VERSUS HOST DISEASE IN BRAZIL: RESULTS FROM A MULTI-REGIONAL DELPHI PANEL
BibTeX
@article{ramsey2026evolution,
title = {{The Evolution of TMR Utilization: A 23-Year Journey from Exploratory Upper Extremity Prosthesis Control to Standard of Care for Major Amputations and Pain Management}},
author = {Matthew D. Ramsey and Jason Zhang and Muhammad T. Hassan and Sophia Bonfigli and Jason H. Ko and Levi J. Hargrove},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15207874},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/20/7874},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - The Evolution of TMR Utilization: A 23-Year Journey from Exploratory Upper Extremity Prosthesis Control to Standard of Care for Major Amputations and Pain Management
AU - Matthew D. Ramsey
AU - Jason Zhang
AU - Muhammad T. Hassan
AU - Sophia Bonfigli
AU - Jason H. Ko
AU - Levi J. Hargrove
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15207874
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/20/7874
AB - Background: Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) has become increasingly utilized beyond advanced myoelectric control to treat and prevent neuropathic pain. This study aims to evaluate changes in practice patterns in TMR utilization. Methods: A single-center, retrospective review was conducted for TMR procedures from 2002 to 2025 using CPT codes and publications. Case volumes were analyzed by major amputation level, timing, and for patients without amputation. A bibliographic analysis from 2004 to 2025 was then conducted to model corresponding research activity. Trends were analyzed using negative binomial regression and logistic regression with α = 0.05. Results: A total of 569 TMR cases were analyzed, including 145 below-knee amputations, 72 above-knee, 102 major upper extremity amputations, and 159 cases for chronic pain in non-amputees. For all-cause indications, there were 196 acute and 373 delayed procedures. Annual TMR volume increased most rapidly from 2016 to 2019, corresponding to new chronic pain applications. Lower extremity cases became and remained more prevalent in 2017, and acute cases became more common in 2025. The proportion of acute TMR cases increased 20% per year (p < 0.001), and the odds of receiving acute TMR for a major amputation increased by 17% per year (p < 0.001). When stratifying by timing for amputation-related cases only, all-cause, limb-specific reoperation was more frequent after acute TMR versus delayed (33/124 (26.6%) vs. 31/192 (16.1%); p = 0.031) with no difference in nerve-specific reoperation (p = 0.25). Notably, on average, only 15% of major amputations received acute TMR from 2021 to 2025. Publishing activity for TMR most rapidly increased from 2018 to 2020. Conclusions: TMR experienced a rapid evolution in both technique and indications through the late 2010s, mirrored by the published literature. Buy-in from referring surgeons is critical to performing acute TMR, which has been demonstrated to have superior outcomes, but careful consideration must be given to mitigate surgical site complications in this population.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -