ArticleSpinal cord2021
Combining different evaluations of sensation to assess the afferent innervation of the lower urinary tract after SCI.
Article in Spinal cord, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lower urinary tract electrical sensory assessment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BJU international · 2022Pooled it
- Focus on afferent sensory nervous pathways of the lower urinary tract after SCI. Tribute to Sir Ludwig Guttmann.Spinal cord · 2025Review
- Systematic Evaluation of Lower Urinary Tract Sensations to Improve Management of LUTS: ICI-RS 2024.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2025Review
- Sensations Reported During Urodynamic Bladder Filling in Spinal Cord Injury Patients Give Additional Important Information.International neurourology journal · 2022Article
- Testing sensation of gently squeezing the testes has diagnostic value in spinal cord injury men.Spinal cord series and cases · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective cohort study.
objectivesTo study a combination of three evaluations of sensation in the lower urinary tract (LUT) in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI).
settingUniversity Antwerp Belgium, Unicenter study.
methodsEvaluation of perineal sensation with light digital touch, reporting of filling sensation during a standardised urodynamic investigation and determination of the electrical perception threshold (EPT) were evaluated in patients with SCI.
results150 individuals were included: 97 men and 53 women, mean age 46 ± 17 years. Patients had different levels and completeness of SCI, and different techniques for bladder emptying. Seventy-four patients (49%) reported sensation to touch in the perineal area. Sensation of bladder filling was reported in different patterns by 81 patients (54%). EPT was determined in 69 patients of which 50 (72%) reported sensation in different patterns. The outcome of absence/presence of sensation between the three tests differed greatly: with perineal sensation absent 53% had filling sensation (p = 0.040) and 58% positive EPT (p = 0.009). With filling sensation absent 59% had EPT sensation (not significant). Perineal sensation was strongly associated with level and completeness of SCI, while a significant association existed for filling sensations FSF, FDV, SDV and EPT in the distal urethra.
conclusionsOur study shows that different evaluations of sensation in the LUT of individuals with SCI complement each other. and we therefore propose combined use in the urological evaluation of patients with SCI to allow a more complete picture of the LUT sensations.
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.