Literature DB >> 29024404

Removal of Sacral Nerve Stimulation Devices for Magnetic Resonance Imaging: What Happens Next?

Jessica C Lloyd1, Bradley C Gill1,2,3, Javier Pizarro-Berdichevsky4,5, Howard B Goldman1,3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) devices (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) are not approved to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of sites other than the head. When MRIs are required, devices are often removed prior to imaging. We reviewed the prevalence of device removal for MRI at a large academic institution and the subsequent clinical course of these patients.
METHODS: A retrospective review of all SNM explants from 2009-2015 was performed. Cases explanted for MRI were analyzed to collect demographics, clinical characteristics, and postremoval management. Descriptive statistics were calculated.
RESULTS: Ninety patients underwent SNM device removal, with 21 (23%) occurring for MRI. At explant, 20 patients (95%) were female and median age was 66 years. Suboptimal symptom control from SNM was noted in seven (33%) of these patients preoperatively. Of those explanted, six (29%) required MRI for neurologic and 10 (48%) for orthopedic concerns. The remaining MRI indications included abdominal masses (10%), genitourinary disease (5%), surveillance for prior malignancy (5%), and cardiac disease (5%). Only 16 (76%) patients explanted ultimately underwent MRI. MRI results impacted clinical management in 9/16 (56%) of the imaged patients. Only two (10%) of explanted patients underwent device replacement.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving SNM therapy, device removal for MRI is most commonly due to orthopedic and neurologic pathologies. About half of the MRIs performed impacted non-GU clinical management. It is of paramount importance to confirm the necessity of MRI before removing a functional SNM device. Since SNM replacement was rare in this cohort, research is needed on the safety of various MRI types with SNM devices in vivo.
© 2017 International Neuromodulation Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fecal incontinence; magnetic resonance imaging; neurourology; refractory overactive bladder; sacral neuromodulation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29024404     DOI: 10.1111/ner.12700

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuromodulation        ISSN: 1094-7159


  4 in total

Review 1.  What Is New in Neuromodulation?

Authors:  Courtenay K Moore; Jessica J Rueb; Samir Derisavifard
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Removal of sacral neuromodulation quadripolar tined-lead using a straight stylet: description of a surgical technique.

Authors:  M Agnello; M Vottero; P Bertapelle
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 3.781

3.  One-year outcomes of the ARTISAN-SNM study with the Axonics System for the treatment of urinary urgency incontinence.

Authors:  Kevin Benson; Rebecca McCrery; Chris Taylor; Osvaldo Padron; Bertil Blok; Stefan de Wachter; Andrea Pezzella; Jennifer Gruenenfelder; Mahreen Pakzad; Marie-Aimee Perrouin-Verbe; Philip Van Kerrebroeck; Jeffrey Mangel; Kenneth Peters; Michael Kennelly; Andrew Shapiro; Una Lee; Craig Comiter; Margaret Mueller; Howard Goldman; Felicia Lane
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 2.696

4.  Sacral neuromodulation - when and for who.

Authors:  Marcelo Mass-Lindenbaum; D Calderón-Pollak; H B Goldman; Javier Pizarro-Berdichevsky
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2021 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.