Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is an effective approach for treating lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD), and stimulation programming is essential for successful treatment. However, research on SNM programming for various indications is limited. Thus, the authors aimed to determine whether there were differences in the stimulation parameters for different SNM indications and the appropriate programming recommendations.
Materials And Methods: Clinical data were retrospectively collected from patients with LUTD who underwent SNM and completed internal pulse generator implantation. The parameters with the highest patient satisfaction or the most symptom improvement during the test period were considered optimal and used to set the programming after internal pulse generator implantation.
Results: After screening, 282 patients were enrolled and categorized into four groups based on the following indications: refractory overactive bladder (OAB) ( n =61), neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (nLUTD) ( n =162), interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome (IC/BPS) ( n =24), and idiopathic nonobstructive urinary retention (NOUR) ( n =35). When analyzing the optimal stimulus parameters, disparities in the stimulation amplitude and pulse frequency were noted among the four groups. The stimulation amplitude in the nLUTD group was higher than that in the idiopathic NOUR group ( P =0.013). Differences in pulse frequency were observed between the refractory OAB and nLUTD groups ( P <0.001) and between the refractory OAB and idiopathic NOUR groups ( P =0.001). No differences in the electrode configuration or pulse width settings existed among the four groups.
Conclusions: The stimulation parameters for SNM varied among the different indications. For the initial programming of stage I, most patients are recommended to start with stimulation amplitudes below 2 V, although patients with nLUTD may benefit from higher amplitudes. A standard pulse width of 210 μs is recommended for all patients. However, for individuals experiencing nLUTD or idiopathic NOUR, the pulse frequency can begin above the standard 14 Hz but not exceed 50 Hz.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11175814 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000001302 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!