ArticleSurgical neurology international2013
S3 motor branch stimulation failure due to nerve fiber burning at the nerve-wire junction: A historical technical note.
Article in Surgical neurology international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSacral nerve stimulation is a minimally invasive procedure to treat spinal cord injured (SCI) patients with overactive bladder syndrome or nonobstructive urinary retention that is refractory to conservative treatment.
methodsIn this paper, we report a case of traumatic cervical SCI with quadriplegia and spastic bladder, which was managed by third sacral motor branch stimulation in 1998.
resultsIn this case, stimulation-induced burning of nerve fibers was seen microscopically during the implantation surgery. At 2 weeks after the index surgery, the stimulator was removed due to ineffectiveness. We hypothesize that the stimulation settings of our stimulator were not appropriate for neural stimulation and led to neural destruction, fibrosis, and treatment failure.
conclusionThe device settings of stimulators used in neural stimulation should be appropriate for direct neural stimulation otherwise they can lead to neural destruction and treatment failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.