Sacral versus pudendal nerve stimulation for voiding dysfunction: A prospective, single‐blinded, randomized, crossover trial

Peters, Kenneth M.; Feber, Kevin; Bennett, R. C.

doi:10.1002/nau.20174

Cited by 181 publications

(144 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A potential benefit is increased afferent stimulation to the micturition centre through all three sacral nerve roots. We recently reported our acute comparative results of SNS vs PNS for various voiding dysfunctions, and the present study is a subset analysis of those with IC in that trial [9]. There have been no reports of chronic PNS in patients with IC, but a recent small study on overactive bladder was reported [10].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

A prospective, single‐blind, randomized crossover trial of sacral vs pudendal nerve stimulation for interstitial cystitis

2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

generator and patients were followed at 1, 3 and 6 months. RESULTSThe time required to place a sacral lead was 27.4 min, and a pudendal lead 19.6 min ( P = 0.039). Of the 22 patients, 17 (77%) responded and had a permanent implant placed. PNS was chosen as the better lead in 77% and SNS in 24%. The order in which the lead was stimulated had no effect on the final lead implanted and there was no 'carry-over' effect. The overall reduction in symptoms was 59% for PNS and 44% for SNS ( P = 0.05). At 6 months after implantation, voids improved by 41% (PNS) and 33% (SNS), and mean voided volume increased 95% and 21%, respectively; validated IC questionnaires improved markedly and complications were minimal. CONCLUSIONSThis is the first 'blinded' study of SNS vs PNS for IC. A pudendal lead was implanted successfully in all patients, and most chose PNS as better than SNS; the improvement was sustained over time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

A prospective, single‐blind, randomized crossover trial of sacral vs pudendal nerve stimulation for interstitial cystitis

2007

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Spinelli and Peters and colleagues have used the tined lead used for InterStim therapy to chronically stimulate the pudendal nerve and have also reported promising results, with Peters reporting a possible superior effect of pudendal stimulation in a series of patients simultaneously implanted with both a sacral lead and pudendal leads. 62,63 Both series were small, however, and further study is needed.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 95%

Sacral Nerve Stimulation: Neuromodulation for Voiding Dysfunction and Pain

Mayer

Howard

2008

Neurotherapeutics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:Voiding dysfunction, which includes incontinence, retention, and chronic pelvic pain, is a relatively frequent problem that can be difficult to manage. Neuromodulation via stimulation of the sacral nerves has been shown to improve thesesymptoms, although the exact mechanisms remain elusive. Techniques for nerve stimulation may vary, depending on the disease, location of pain, and the patient's anatomy. In addition to placement of electrodes on the sacral nerve roots, modulation has also been reported by peripheral branches of the sacral nerves including the pudendal and posterior tibial nerves. Newer surgical techniques have significantly decreased the morbidity of the procedures and increased the probability of a successful outcome.

show abstract

“…In one study comparing pudendal nerve stimulation to sacral root stimulation, a majority of patients with non-neurogenic bladders preferred the pudendal nerve approach. 82 Flow receptors in the urethra are thought to mediate a micturition reflex, which can be triggered by stimulating the pudendal nerve trunk or branches to the urethra while the bladder is partially full. Studies in cats have established that specific stimulation patterns may be optimal for selection of the pudendal-mediated continence and micturition reflexes.…”

Section: Bladder Neuroprosthesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neuroprosthetic technology for individuals with spinal cord injury

Collinger¹,

Foldes

Bruns

et al. 2013

The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: Spinal cord injury (SCI) results in a loss of function and sensation below the level of the lesion. Neuroprosthetic technology has been developed to help restore motor and autonomic functions as well as to provide sensory feedback. Findings: This paper provides an overview of neuroprosthetic technology that aims to address the priorities for functional restoration as defined by individuals with SCI. We describe neuroprostheses that are in various stages of preclinical development, clinical testing, and commercialization including functional electrical stimulators, epidural and intraspinal microstimulation, bladder neuroprosthesis, and cortical stimulation for restoring sensation. We also discuss neural recording technologies that may provide command or feedback signals for neuroprosthetic devices. Conclusion/clinical relevance: Neuroprostheses have begun to address the priorities of individuals with SCI, although there remains room for improvement. In addition to continued technological improvements, closing the loop between the technology and the user may help provide intuitive device control with high levels of performance.

show abstract

Sacral versus pudendal nerve stimulation for voiding dysfunction: A prospective, single‐blinded, randomized, crossover trial

Cited by 181 publications

References 9 publications

A prospective, single‐blind, randomized crossover trial of sacral vs pudendal nerve stimulation for interstitial cystitis

A prospective, single‐blind, randomized crossover trial of sacral vs pudendal nerve stimulation for interstitial cystitis

Sacral Nerve Stimulation: Neuromodulation for Voiding Dysfunction and Pain

Neuroprosthetic technology for individuals with spinal cord injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About