PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14678359

Cavernosal nerve mapping: current data and applications.

Abstract

Although nerve-sparing prostatectomy is widely practised, the results with respect to preserving potency often do not meet expectations. The concept of intraoperative cavernosal nerve stimulation is reasonable. Data that link the response to sildenafil after prostatectomy with bilateral nerve sparing has increased the importance of optimizing nerve sparing. The cavernosal nerves are often difficult to visualize and may have a variable course. A tumescent response to nerve stimulation can be shown consistently; the response may be subtle, and characterized by a minimal increase in penile circumference and blood flow. Immediately after prostatectomy, proximal nerve stimulation identifies whether neural continuity has been maintained, and is predictive of recovery of erectile function. The Cavermap system (Uromed Corporation, Boston, MA, USA) was developed to permit intraoperative nerve stimulation with tumescence monitoring. An initial phase 2 and subsequent phase 3 single-blinded, randomized, multicentre study that compared Cavermap-assisted prostatectomy with conventional nerve sparing showed a significant benefit in terms of the duration of nocturnal tumescence at 1 year. Other approaches are being explored, including incorporating the device into sural or genito-femoral nerve grafting, use of nerve stimulation during cystectomy or abdominal-perineal resection, and direct corpus cavernosal pressure monitoring during nerve stimulation. These approaches warrant further evaluation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L Klotz. 2004. Cavernosal nerve mapping: current data and applications.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.04546.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Evaluation of the pull test technique in assessing postural instability in Parkinson's disease.

Variability in pull test (PT) performance can lead to inadequate evaluation of postural instability in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD). Assessing 66 PTs by 25 examiners, at least two of four raters agreed that specific items were performed incorrectly for stance in 27.3%, for strength and briskness of the pull in 84.9%, for examiner's response in 36.4%, and for technique issues in 9.1%. Examiners were consistent in their errors, and only 9% of examinations were error-free.

Diagnostic Techniques, Neurological↗

Neurology 2004.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Diagnostic Techniques, Neurological↗