Literature DB >> 17078071

Sacral nerve stimulation for voiding dysfunction: One institution's 11-year experience.

Suzette E Sutherland1, Ann Lavers, Angeline Carlson, Cindy Holtz, Jyothi Kesha, Steven W Siegel.   

Abstract

AIM: The purpose of this study was to review our institution's 11-year experience with SNS for the treatment of refractory voiding dysfunction. Dating back to 1993, it covers a span of time which describes the evolution of SNS as it includes PNE trials, non-tined (bone-anchored or fascial-anchored) leads, percutaneous tined leads with two-staged procedures, and even percutaneous pudendal trials.
METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on SNS patients who received an implantable pulse generator (IPG) in our practice from 12/1993 to 12/2004. After Institutional Review Board approval, consents for chart review were obtained from 104 patients, representing 44% of this neuromodulatory patient population.
RESULTS: Of our population, 87% were female and 13% were male. Average age at implant was 50 years +/- 13.4 years. Duration of symptoms before implantation was 116 months (range 9-600 months). Eighty percent were implanted for a predominant complaint of urinary urgency and frequency (U/F). Overall, 22% had U/F only, 38% had concomitant urge incontinence (UI), and 20% had concomitant mixed incontinence (MI). Twenty percent were treated for non-obstructive urinary retention (UR), with half of these associated with a neurogenic etiology. Additionally, 46.2% had pelvic pain, 58.6% had bowel complaints, and 51% reported sexual dysfunction. In patients with U/F, mean voiding parameters as described by pre-implant voiding diaries revealed the following: 12.4 (+/-5.1) voids per 24 hr; 2.3 (+/-1.8) voids per night; 5.0 (+/-4.7) leaks per 24 hr; and 2.3 (+/-2.6) pads per 24 hr. Statistically significant improvements post-implantation were noted with mean decreases in the following: 4.3 voids per 24 hr; 1.0 void per night; 4.4 leaks per 24 hr; and 2.3 pads per 24 hr (all P < 0.05). In the UR group a statistically significant improvement post-implantation was noted only in voids per night, with a mean decrease of 0.8 (P < 0.05). With a mean follow up of 22 months (range 3-162 months), sustained subjective improvement was >50%, >80%, and >90% in 69%, 50%, and 35% of patients, respectively. By quality of life survey, 60.5% of patients were satisfied and 16.1% were dissatisfied with current urinary symptoms. Only 13% (14 patients) abandoned therapy, making up a significant portion of those dissatisfied with current urinary symptoms. Good overall lead durability was seen (mean 22 months, range 1-121 months), with the first successful lead proving to be the most durable (mean 28 months, range 1.4-120 months). Lead durability decreased progressively with subsequent trials. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least one reportable event (RE) attributable to either lead or IPG. A total of 126 REs were noted, with 97% mild-to-moderate in severity. REs included lack of efficacy, loss of efficacy, infection, hematoma/seroma, migration, pain, undesirable change in sensation, and device malfunction. In this population, 47.1% of leads were tined while 52.9% were non-tined. Tined leads had an overall lower RE rate as compared to non-tined leads: 28% and 73%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: SNS is an effective method for treating certain types of voiding dysfunction. Although 53% of patients experienced at least one RE, 97% were mild-to-moderate and did not appear to affect the continued use of this therapy. With improved technology, such as percutaneous tined leads, the RE rate is decreasing. Further analyses of subsets of this population are currently underway. Copyright 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17078071     DOI: 10.1002/nau.20345

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn        ISSN: 0733-2467            Impact factor:   2.696


  29 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of clinical studies of electrical stimulation for treatment of lower urinary tract dysfunction.

Authors:  Ash K Monga; Michael R Tracey; Jeyakumar Subbaroyan
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-03-17       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  Sacral neuromodulation for lower urinary tract dysfunction.

Authors:  Philip E V Van Kerrebroeck; Tom A T Marcelissen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2011-10-12       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Sacral nerve stimulation: neuromodulation for voiding dysfunction and pain.

Authors:  Robert D Mayer; Fred M Howard
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 7.620

Review 4.  Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation and sacral neuromodulation: an update.

Authors:  Priyanka Gupta; Michael J Ehlert; Larry T Sirls; Kenneth M Peters
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Involvement of opioid receptors in inhibition of bladder overactivity induced by foot stimulation in cats.

Authors:  Changfeng Tai; P Dafe Ogagan; Guoqing Chen; Jeffrey A Larson; Bing Shen; Jicheng Wang; James R Roppolo; William C de Groat
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-07-21       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Influence of naloxone on inhibitory pudendal-to-bladder reflex in cats.

Authors:  Mang L Chen; Bing Shen; Jicheng Wang; Hailong Liu; James R Roppolo; William C de Groat; Changfeng Tai
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  2010-04-09       Impact factor: 5.330

7.  Battery explantation after sacral neuromodulation in the Medicare population.

Authors:  Anne P Cameron; Jennifer T Anger; Rodger Madison; Christopher S Saigal; J Quentin Clemens
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 2.696

Review 8.  Contrasting the percutaneous nerve evaluation versus staged implantation in sacral neuromodulation.

Authors:  Chad Baxter; Ja-Hong Kim
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.092

9.  Sacral neuromodulation: Therapy evolution.

Authors:  Jannah H Thompson; Suzette E Sutherland; Steven W Siegel
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2010-07

10.  Refractory overactive bladder: Beyond oral anticholinergic therapy.

Authors:  Ronald W Glinski; Steven Siegel
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2007-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.