Literature DB >> 19338551

Microbiological tined-lead examination: does prolonged sacral neuromodulation testing induce infection?

Mirjam Huwyler1, Gustav Kiss, Fiona C Burkhard, Helmut Madersbacher, Thomas M Kessler.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether prolonged sacral neuromodulation (SNM) testing induces a substantial risk of infection because of the percutaneous passage of the extension wire. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A consecutive series of 20 patients with negative prolonged SNM testing for >or=14 days who underwent tined-lead explantation were prospectively evaluated. The explanted tined leads were sent for microbiological examination. The tined lead, gluteal, and extension wire incision sites were investigated for clinical signs of infection according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention classification system.
RESULTS: In all, 17 patients had bilateral and three unilateral implanted tined leads. The median (range) test period was 30 (21-62 days). Bacterial growth (Staphylococcus species) was detected in four of 20 (20%) patients on seven of 37 (19%) explanted tined leads. There were clinical signs of infection in one of 20 (5%) patients at none of 37 tined lead, one of 20 (5%) gluteal, and none of 20 extension wire incision sites. There were no clinical signs of infection in the remaining three of four patients with bacterial growth.
CONCLUSIONS: After prolonged tined-lead testing, we found an infection rate comparable to that reported with the usual short test period. In addition, most patients with bacterial growth on tined leads showed no clinical signs of infection. Thus, prolonged tined-lead testing does not seem to induce clinically relevant infection, warranting randomized trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19338551     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08501.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  6 in total

Review 1.  How does sacral modulation work best? Placement and programming techniques to maximize efficacy.

Authors:  Bastian Amend; Mahmoud Khalil; Thomas M Kessler; Karl-Dietrich Sievert
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 2.  Sacral Neuromodulation Implant Infection: Risk Factors and Prevention.

Authors:  Calvin Lee; Javier Pizarro-Berdichevsky; Marisa M Clifton; Sandip P Vasavada
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  [Sacral neuromodulation for neurogenic bladder dysfunction].

Authors:  T M Kessler; J Wöllner; M Kozomara; L Mordasini; U Mehnert
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 4.  Infection Rates of Electrical Leads Used for Percutaneous Neurostimulation of the Peripheral Nervous System.

Authors:  Brian M Ilfeld; Rodney A Gabriel; Michael F Saulino; John Chae; P Hunter Peckham; Stuart A Grant; Christopher A Gilmore; Michael C Donohue; Matthew G deBock; Amorn Wongsarnpigoon; Joseph W Boggs
Journal:  Pain Pract       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 3.183

5.  Differences in sacral neuromodulation device infection rates based on preoperative antibiotic selection.

Authors:  Allen M Haraway; J Quentin Clemens; Chang He; Cynthia Stroup; Humphrey O Atiemo; Anne P Cameron
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Effects of Appropriate Prolonged Sacral Neuromodulation Testing in Improving Implantation Rate of a Permanent Implantable Pulse Generator in Patients with Refractory Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunctions in Mainland China.

Authors:  Peng Zhang; Jian-Zhong Zhang; Li-Yang Wu; Xiao-Dong Zhang
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 2.628

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.