Phenol Neurolysis for the Management of Shoulder Spasticity in Early Recovery From Traumatic Brain Injury: A Case Report

Phenolysis for Advanced Shoulder Osteoarthritis: A Case Series of a Novel Ultrasound-Guided Approach to Anterior and Posterior Glenohumeral Articular Nerve Branches

INTRODUCTION

The shoulder is one of the joints most affected by osteoarthritis, with a prevalence of almost 20% in adults over 65 years of age. Various treatments have been proposed to control osteoarthritis pain, including radiofrequency, pulsed and thermal, and recently cryoanalgesia. We propose in this series of cases a new approach to analgesic therapy with chemical denervation with phenol.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

Patients who underwent phenolysis for shoulder osteoarthritis at our institutions in Italy and Australia between August 2022 and May 2023 were included. All patients included in our report provided written consent for publication. This chemical neurolysis technique consisted of two injections. First, the anterior shoulder capsule was denervated by a modified deep SHAC (Shoulder Anterior Capsule) approach to cover the anterior terminal articular branches of the axillary nerve, lateral pectoral nerve, and subscapularis nerve. Second, the posterior shoulder capsule was denervated by a posterior glenoid approach to cover the terminal articular branches of the suprascapular nerve (SSN).  Results: We included a total of 11 patients in this case series. Ten of 11 patients were affected by shoulder osteoarthritis, of which three had rotator cuff tendinopathy and three had full-thickness cuff tears. One patient had chronic subluxation of a shoulder prosthesis. After treatment, all patients significantly reduced pain immediately after treatment and, two weeks later, recovered joint movement and improved quality of life. No adverse events or loss of motor function following treatment.

CONCLUSION

We presented a novel chemical approach to shoulder denervation, which was shown to be another effective way of improving pain and function in advanced glenohumeral arthritis.

A New Definition of Poststroke Spasticity and the Interference of Spasticity With Motor Recovery From Acute to Chronic Stages

The relationship of poststroke spasticity and motor recovery can be confusing. "True" motor recovery refers to return of motor behaviors to prestroke state with the same end-effectors and temporo-spatial pattern. This requires neural recovery and repair, and presumably occurs mainly in the acute and subacute stages. However, according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, motor recovery after stroke is also defined as "improvement in performance of functional tasks," i.e., functional recovery, which is mainly mediated by compensatory mechanisms. Therefore, stroke survivors can execute motor tasks in spite of disordered motor control and the presence of spasticity. Spasticity interferes with execution of normal motor behaviors ("true" motor recovery), throughout the evolution of stroke from acute to chronic stages. Spasticity reduction does not affect functional recovery in the acute and subacute stages; however, appropriate management of spasticity could lead to improvement of motor function, that is, functional recovery, during the chronic stage of stroke. We assert that spasticity results from upregulation of medial cortico-reticulo-spinal pathways that are disinhibited due to damage of the motor cortex or corticobulbar pathways. Spasticity emerges as a manifestation of maladaptive plasticity in the early stages of recovery and can persist into the chronic stage. It coexists and shares similar pathophysiological processes with related motor impairments, such as abnormal force control, muscle coactivation and motor synergies, and diffuse interlimb muscle activation. Accordingly, we propose a new definition of spasticity to better account for its pathophysiology and the complex nuances of different definitions of motor recovery.