Literature DB >> 17982710

Implant infection after two-stage sacral nerve stimulator placement.

Blair B Washington1, Brian J Hines.   

Abstract

To report our experience with implant infection after two-stage sacral nerve stimulator placement. We reviewed the records of all patients who underwent implantation with a sacral nerve stimulator for the management of refractory cases of urge urinary incontinence, urinary frequency, and non-obstructive urinary retention. Baseline demographic data, interval to the development of infection, and the organism cultured are reported. After stage II neurostimulator placement, 5 out of 37 (13.5%) women required device removal for culture positive wound infections. Patients returned an average of 147.4 days after device implantation with evidence of infection. Infection occurred a minimum of 33 days, a median of 76 days, and a maximum of 461 days after sacral nerve stimulator implantation. The most common pathogen cultured was Staphylococcus aureus. After device removal, all patients resolved their infections. Two patients underwent uncomplicated reimplantation in the contralateral buttock 14 and 16 days after stimulator removal. The risk of infection after tined lead pretest and neurostimulator placement may be higher than previously observed in older techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17982710     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-007-0386-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct


  5 in total

1.  Complications and troubleshooting of sacral neuromodulation therapy.

Authors:  Adonis Hijaz; Sandip Vasavada
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.241

Review 2.  Surgical site infections.

Authors:  S Lauwers; F de Smet
Journal:  Acta Clin Belg       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 1.264

3.  Efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation for urinary retention: results 18 months after implantation.

Authors:  U Jonas; C J Fowler; M B Chancellor; M M Elhilali; M Fall; J B Gajewski; V Grünewald; M M Hassouna; U Hombergh; R Janknegt; P E van Kerrebroeck; A A Lylcklama a Nijeholt; S W Siegel; R A Schmidt
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Bacterial contamination of test stimulation leads during percutaneous nerve stimulation.

Authors:  Jürgen Pannek; Ute Grigoleit; Andreas Hinkel
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  The role of neuromodulation in the management of urinary urge incontinence.

Authors:  P Abrams; J G Blaivas; C J Fowler; J L Fourcroy; S A Macdiarmid; S W Siegel; P Van Kerrebroeck
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 5.588

  5 in total
  2 in total

1.  Infection rates in a large investigational trial of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Steven D Wexner; Tracy Hull; Yair Edden; John A Coller; Ghislain Devroede; Richard McCallum; Miranda Chan; Jennifer M Ayscue; Abbas S Shobeiri; David Margolin; Michael England; Howard Kaufman; William J Snape; Ece Mutlu; Heidi Chua; Paul Pettit; Deborah Nagle; Robert D Madoff; Darin R Lerew; Anders Mellgren
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Sacral neuromodulation for bowel dysfunction: a consensus statement from the Italian group.

Authors:  E Falletto; E Ganio; G Naldini; C Ratto; D F Altomare
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 3.781

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.