Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: The agonist–antagonist myoneural interface (AMI) is a bi-directional neural communication platform created to augment volitional motor control, diminish pain, and restore proprioception. We have furthermore hypothesized that AMI construction may preserve limb volume. Objectives: To verify whether AMI construction leads to preserved residual limb volume in transtibial and transfemoral amputations. Study Design: Prospective cohort interventional study. Methods: Patients were recruited for transtibial (TTA) or transfemoral (TFA) amputations with AMI construction at Brigham & Women’s Faulkner Hospital between June 2016 and October 2025. Limb volume was estimated from serially collected circumferential measurements at distinct points along the limb over time. Results: Forty-seven modified amputations, including AMI construction, were performed in 40 patients over the course of the study. Forty (85%) were TTAs, while 7 (15%) were TFAs. Seven patients (18%) underwent bilateral amputations. The ratio of biological male to female patients was 58:42%, with a mean age of 39.5 ± 12.1 years and a mean body mass index of 26.9 ± 5.4 kg/m 2 . The average length of follow-up was 518 ± 598 days, with a range of 27–3109 days. The TTA and TFA cohorts demonstrated overall median limb volume preservation ratios of 1.00 ± 0.13 and 0.96 ± 0.09, respectively, with ratios of 0.94 ± 0.10 and 0.98 ± 0.11, respectively, noted in patients greater than 2 years post-surgery. Greater volume preservation was noted in the proximal portions of residual limbs. Bilateral amputees did not demonstrate volume preservation trends statistically different from those of unilateral amputees. Conclusion: AMI construction may offer the potential to preserve near-total long-term residual limb volume in TTAs and TFAs. Clinical Relevance: AMI construction may mitigate some of the long-term negative sequelae of lower limb amputation associated with muscle disuse atrophy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cason et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: