AIMS: The goal of this study was to evaluate whether the intravaginal electrode used to perform vaginal electrical stimulation could induce acute changes on the cystometrograms and urethral pressure profiles (UPP) recordings. METHODS: Three consecutive urodynamic examinations were performed on 30 women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) symptoms. The first exam was performed without the electrode, the second with the electrode inserted into the vagina, but with the stimulator switched off and the third with the stimulator turned on. We used the INNOVA (Empi) stimulator with electrical parameters set at 50 Hz and 60 mA and on an intermittent cycle during the cystometries and a continuous stimulation during the UPP. The data of functional profile length (FPL), maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP), and area of the resting UPP, as well as the filling sensations and its respective bladder volumes during the cystometries, were compared. With regard to the cystometries. RESULTS: No effect of the electrode was observed on cystometry. However, the simple presence of the electrode improved the FPL, MUCP, and areas of the UPP similar to those when the stimulation was applied. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that, the presence of the intravaginal electrode induces changes in the UPP not related to the stimulation itself. The physiotherapeutic effect of the electrode itself is still to be evaluated. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
AIMS: The goal of this study was to evaluate whether the intravaginal electrode used to perform vaginal electrical stimulation could induce acute changes on the cystometrograms and urethral pressure profiles (UPP) recordings. METHODS: Three consecutive urodynamic examinations were performed on 30 women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) symptoms. The first exam was performed without the electrode, the second with the electrode inserted into the vagina, but with the stimulator switched off and the third with the stimulator turned on. We used the INNOVA (Empi) stimulator with electrical parameters set at 50 Hz and 60 mA and on an intermittent cycle during the cystometries and a continuous stimulation during the UPP. The data of functional profile length (FPL), maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP), and area of the resting UPP, as well as the filling sensations and its respective bladder volumes during the cystometries, were compared. With regard to the cystometries. RESULTS: No effect of the electrode was observed on cystometry. However, the simple presence of the electrode improved the FPL, MUCP, and areas of the UPP similar to those when the stimulation was applied. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that, the presence of the intravaginal electrode induces changes in the UPP not related to the stimulation itself. The physiotherapeutic effect of the electrode itself is still to be evaluated. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.