PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 2436186

FES for bladder: direct or indirect means?

Abstract

Efforts to restore function to the neurologically disabled lower urinary tract by direct electrical stimulation of the bladder wall have met with only very limited success. This has been due to pain and cocontraction of bladder outlet mechanisms caused by presumed spread of the large currents required to effectively directly stimulate the detrusor muscle. Stimulation at the four anatomical sites of the sacral neural outflow on the other hand has been more successful. Conus medullaris stimulation has resulted in "good results" in just over half of the 28 patients so treated. Acceptance of this technique has been limited by the poor selectivity of the intramedullary electrodes in stimulating only the target motor neurons and the resultant clinical problems with the consequent stimulus current spread. Sacral anterior root stimulation has been used in at least 88 patients with generally good results. Cocontraction of the detrusor and external urethral sphincter are circumvented by the use of an intermittent pattern of stimulation. The primary disadvantage of this technique is the obligatory placement of the electrodes within the cerebrospinal fluid compartment. Clinical experience with stimulation of the extradural sacral mixed nerves is limited. Experimental studies indicate that success with this technique requires dorsal rhizotomy and pudendal neurotomy. Preliminary clinical experience suggests that these surgical manipulations may not be necessary for a successful outcome. The literature on clinical application of pelvic nerve stimulation is too limited for detailed comment on this technique. A definitive technique for restoration of bladder function by electrical stimulation remains to be developed.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

A Talalla, J W Bloom, N Quang. 1987. FES for bladder: direct or indirect means?. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8159.1987.tb05956.x

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Modeling biological motor control for human locomotion with functional electrical stimulation.

This paper develops a novel control system for functional electrical stimulation (FES) locomotion, which aims to generate normal locomotion for paraplegics via FES. It explores the possibility of applying ideas from biology to engineering. The neural control mechanism of the biological motor system, the central pattern generator, has been adopted in the control system design. Some artificial control techniques such as neural network control, fuzzy logic, control and impedance control are incorporated to refine the control performance. Several types of sensory feedback are integrated to endow this control system with an adaptive ability. A musculoskeletal model with 7 segments and 18 muscles is constructed for the simulation study. Satisfactory simulation results are achieved under this FES control system, which indicates a promising technique for the potential application of FES locomotion in future.

Electric Stimulation Therapy↗

Complications and troubleshooting of two-stage sacral neuromodulation therapy: a single-institution experience.

OBJECTIVES: With the increasing use of sacral neuromodulation therapy, urologists are faced with postimplantation challenges. The purpose of this study was to identify these events and their causes and management in our large single-institution experience. METHODS: From July 2002 to September 2004, all patients who underwent sacral neuromodulation therapy for refractory bladder conditions were identified. Their medical records were retrospectively evaluated for history, operative intervention, and programming visits. Events after implantation of the implantable pulse generator (IPG) unit were noted. The evaluation, troubleshooting, management, and resolution of events at the last follow-up visit were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 214 patients underwent sacral neuromodulation therapy at our institution. The mean patient age was 53.5 +/- 15.4 years. Of the 214 patients, 161 underwent IPG implantation during a mean follow-up period of 16 months (range 5 to 30). The second-stage explantation and revision rate was 10.5% and 16.1%, respectively. The indications for explantation were infection (8 of 17) and failure to maintain a response (9 of 17). Revisions were done for decreases in response with abnormal (12 of 26) or normal (5 of 26) impedance measurements, IPG site discomfort (4 of 26), draining sinus at the IPG site (4 of 26), and lead migration (1 of 26). Equalization of impedance measurements was the most commonly observed impedance abnormality. These were managed by drying fluid from the connection in 4 patients and lead change in the rest. CONCLUSIONS: After IPG implantation, a decline in response may occur. Although some were explanted, most were revised, with most of the revisions functional on follow-up. Familiarity with impedance evaluation and development of algorithms for postimplant management are essential for troubleshooting and maintenance of the device.

Electric Stimulation Therapy↗