• Magdy M Hassouna and Mohamed S Elkelini.
• Division of Urology, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.
• Cuaj Can Urol Assoc. 2007 Jun 1; 1 (2): 106-10.

IntroductionPelvic neuromodulation is an established method of treating voiding dysfunction. Little is known about the pathophysiology associated with voiding dysfunction. Reports have suggested that a delay in treating patients with sacral neuromodulation therapy can impact the success rate of this type of treatment in voiding dysfunction. We examined patient response to pelvic neuromodulation when it was applied early versus late in the postdiagnosis of voiding dysfunction.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study of 42 patients (38 women and 4 men) with voiding dysfunction who underwent surgery for implant with the Interstim (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn.). Prior to implantation, patients were required to pass a percutaneous nerve evaluation (PNE) over a 1-week period. Patients were observed for 20-48 months postimplantation. All patients recorded their voiding parameters at baseline, after screening and every 6 months thereafter. Twenty patients (in the early group) underwent implant surgery with the neurostimulator 2-4 weeks post-PNE, and 22 patients (the late group) had the device implanted 6-24 months post-PNE owing to local logistical circumstances.ResultsIn the early group, 16 of 20 patients (80%) maintained a good response. In the late group, 13 of 22 (59%) patients showed a good response. Groups were well matched in terms of age, duration of voiding dysfunction and incidence of comorbidity.ConclusionPatients who were delayed more than 6 months in receiving the neurostimulator implant showed a worse response than did patients who had the device implanted soon after PNE. This indicates the possibility of disease progression, which may limit the response to sacral neuromodulation.

3 keywords...

hide…