Anubhav Agrawal1, Sean Lamar Francis2, Nicolette Elizabeth Deveneau3, Shaily Jain4, Christopher Abrasley5, Jason Trippe McNeese6, Shivangi T Kothari7, Christopher J Lahr8, Thomas L Abell9. 1. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA. a0agra05@louisville.edu. 2. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA. slfran12@louisville.edu. 3. Division of Female Pelvic Medicine & Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA. nicolette.deveneau@louisville.edu. 4. St. Francis Women's Health Center, Federal Way, WA, USA. sjain@digestivehlth.com. 5. White-Wilson Medical Center, Fort Walton Beach, FL, USA. cabrasle@white-wilson.com. 6. GI Associates, Jackson, MS, USA. trippe.mcneese@gastrodocs.com. 7. University of Rochester Medical Center and Strong Memorial Hospital, Rochester, NY, USA. shivangi_kothari@urmc.rochester.edu. 8. University of Mississippi, Jackson, MS, USA. clahr@umc.edu. 9. Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, 550 S. Jackson Street, ACB A3L15, Louisville, KY, 40202, USA. thomas.abell@louisville.edu.
Abstract
AIMS: The objective of this study was to investigate sacral electrical stimulation (SES) and gastric electrical stimulation (GES) by comparing upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) symptoms and quality of life, before treatment and in the long term after treatment. We hypothesized that dual-device treatment would greatly improve upper and lower gastrointestinal and genitourinary symptoms, as well as quality of life. METHODS: Fifty-four patients who underwent dual-device treatment (GES and SES) were enrolled in this study. Patients who had surpassed 24 months since the second-device insertion were included. Patients were evaluated before and after both devices were implanted and given a symptom questionnaire regarding their upper GI, lower GI, and GU symptoms and their quality of life. RESULTS: With combined treatment, a statistically significant improvement was seen in upper GI, lower GI, and GU symptoms and quality of life. However, fecal incontinence and fecal urgency improvements did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the small sample size. CONCLUSION: The implantation of two stimulators appears to be safe and effective to improve patients' quality of life for those with upper GI symptoms, bowel problems, and bladder dysfunction.
AIMS: The objective of this study was to investigate sacral electrical stimulation (SES) and gastric electrical stimulation (GES) by comparing upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) symptoms and quality of life, before treatment and in the long term after treatment. We hypothesized that dual-device treatment would greatly improve upper and lower gastrointestinal and genitourinary symptoms, as well as quality of life. METHODS: Fifty-four patients who underwent dual-device treatment (GES and SES) were enrolled in this study. Patients who had surpassed 24 months since the second-device insertion were included. Patients were evaluated before and after both devices were implanted and given a symptom questionnaire regarding their upper GI, lower GI, and GU symptoms and their quality of life. RESULTS: With combined treatment, a statistically significant improvement was seen in upper GI, lower GI, and GU symptoms and quality of life. However, fecal incontinence and fecal urgency improvements did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the small sample size. CONCLUSION: The implantation of two stimulators appears to be safe and effective to improve patients' quality of life for those with upper GI symptoms, bowel problems, and bladder dysfunction.
Authors: Philip E V van Kerrebroeck; Anco C van Voskuilen; John P F A Heesakkers; August A B Lycklama á Nijholt; Steven Siegel; U Jonas; Clare J Fowler; Magnus Fall; Jerzy B Gajewski; Magdy M Hassouna; Francesco Cappellano; Mostafa M Elhilali; Douglas F Milam; Anurag K Das; H E Dijkema; Ubi van den Hombergh Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-09-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: E V Carrington; J Evers; U Grossi; P G Dinning; S M Scott; P R O'Connell; J F X Jones; C H Knowles Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: W Bradley Creel; Thomas L Abell; Amy Lobrano; Steven R Deitcher; M Dugdale; David Smalley; William D Johnson Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Christopher J Lahr; James Griffith; Charu Subramony; Lindsey Halley; Kristen Adams; Elizabeth R Paine; Robert Schmieg; Saleem Islam; Jay Salameh; Danielle Spree; Truptesh Kothari; Archana Kedar; Yana Nikitina; Thomas Abell Journal: Am Surg Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Jonas F Schiemer; Karen Stumm; Karin H Somerlik-Fuchs; Klaus-Peter Hoffmann; Jan Baumgart; Werner Kneist Journal: Eur Surg Res Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 1.745
Authors: Jonas F Schiemer; Axel Heimann; Karin H Somerlik-Fuchs; Roman Ruff; Klaus-Peter Hoffmann; Jan Baumgart; Manfred Berres; Hauke Lang; Werner Kneist Journal: J Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.924
Authors: Thomas L Abell; Goro Yamada; Richard W McCallum; Mark L Van Natta; James Tonascia; Henry P Parkman; Kenneth L Koch; Irene Sarosiek; Gianrico Farrugia; Madhusudan Grover; William Hasler; Linda Nguyen; William Snape; Braden Kuo; Robert Shulman; Frank A Hamilton; Pankaj J Pasricha Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2019-10-04 Impact factor: 3.598