ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2019
Variation in bony landmarks and predictors of success with sacral neuromodulation.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2019. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisWe assessed variations in sacral anatomy and lead placement as predictors of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) success. Based solely on bony landmarks, we also assessed the accuracy of the 9 and 2 protocol for locating S3.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study performed from October 2008 to December 2016 at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Fluoroscopic images were used to assess sacral anatomy and lead location. Success was defined as >50% symptom improvement after stage I and clinical response at most recent follow-up.
resultsOf 249 procedures, 209 were primary implants and 40 were revisions among 187 (89.5%) women and 22 (10.5%) men. Success rate was 83.3% for primary implants and 89.4% for revisions. Success was associated with shorter implant duration (21.3 ± 22.2 vs 33.6 ± 25.8 months), higher body mass index (30.3 ± 7.8 vs 27.6 ± 6.1 kg/m
conclusionsVariations in sacral anatomy and lead placement did not predict SNM success. The 2-cm protocol was verified while the 9-cm protocol was not, although neither was predictive of success, which may obviate the need to mark bony landmarks prior to fluoroscopy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30729252What 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.