ArticleCureus2020
A Cadaveric Study on the Efficacy of Surface Marking and Bony Landmarks Used in Sacral Neuromodulation.
Article in Cureus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of surgical techniques for optimal lead placement in sacral neuromodulation: a cadaver study.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Article
- A study on the association between accessory maxillary ostium and maxillary sinus mucosal thickening using cone beam computed tomography.Head & face medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Anatomical landmarks and surface markings have long been used in out-patient contexts for conducting percutaneous nerve evaluation procedures, but studies testing the reliability of these anatomical landmarks are scant. There have been reports where the procedure has failed. Could it be possible that the anatomical landmarks that are used are not reliable enough? To answer this question, we used this study to understand the reliability of these anatomical landmarks. Methods Twenty cadavers, 10 males and 10 females, were dissected in the sacral region; the landmarks were tested, and the angulation and curve made by the sacral 3 (S3) nerve were also studied. Results Sacral 3 was identified mainly at the four o'clock position on the right and at the eight o'clock position on the left side. The Sacral 3 foramen was found at a mean distance of 9.17 ± 0.23 cm from the tip of the coccyx. The mean distance of the lateral margin of S3 from the median sacral ridge was found to be 2.16 ± 0.07 cm. Conclusion The landmark of 9 cm from the coccyx tip is a valid landmark for sacral neuromodulation (SNM) procedures. The tip of the lead should follow the curve of the nerve as close as possible at the four and eight o'clock positions on the right and left side, respectively. However, the length of the coccyx differs from person to person. The proximity of the adjacent foramina to each other and the variations in the emerging of the nerve are a few factors to be considered while performing SNM procedures. Further study with a larger sample is required in order to investigate the course of the nerve, and its relationship to response to SNM.
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.