Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008 Aug;19(8):1137-40. doi: 10.1007/s00192-008-0601-3. Epub 2008 Apr 5.

Sacral neuromodulation reprogramming: is it an office burden?

Author information

  • 1Department of Urology, William Beaumont Hospital, 3535 W. 13 Mile Road Suite 438, Royal Oak, MI 48073, USA. frank.burks@hotmail.com

Abstract

Our objective was to evaluate the burden of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) reprogramming and the reasons for reprogramming, and to correlate these with the underlying diagnosis. A retrospective review of 50 consecutive subjects implanted with SNM was completed from November 2002 through December 2005. Of the 50 SNM implants, 47 subjects had adequate follow-up. The mean age was 53.1 (22-90 years) with 83% women. Of the SNM performed, 91.5% were done for urinary urgency, frequency, or incontinence and 47.4% of those had interstitial cystitis. Overall, 239 programming visits were recorded, and subjects on average had two reprogramming visits per year. There was no correlation with number of reprogramming events and patient age, sex, reason for implantation, or diagnosis. These data suggest that the number of reprogramming episodes is small, and the majority is done as part of routine follow-up. No additional burden was seen in subjects with interstitial cystitis.

PMID:
18392551
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk