ArticleTechniques in coloproctology2022
Comparison of surgical techniques for optimal lead placement in sacral neuromodulation: a cadaver study.
Article in Techniques in coloproctology, 2022. 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.
- Article
- Treatment of fecal incontinence-is there a light in the end of the tunnel?Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSacral neuromodulation (SNM) is a common treatment for patients with urinary and faecal incontinence. A close contact of the tined lead electrode with the targeted nerve is likely to improve functional outcome. The aim of this study was to compare the position of the SNM lead in relation to the sacral nerve by comparing different implantation techniques.
methodsThis cadaver study was conducted at the Division of Anatomy of Vienna's Medical University in October 2020. We dissected 10 cadavers after bilateral SNM lead implantation (n = 20), using two different standardized implantation techniques. The cadavers were categorized as group A (n = 10), representing the conventional guided implantation group and group B (n = 10), where SNM implantation was conducted with the novel fluoroscopy-guided "H"-technique. The primary goal was to assess the distance between the sacral nerve and the lead placement.
resultsThe electrodes were inserted at a median angle of 58.5° (46-65°) in group A and 60° (50-65°) in group B, without reaching statistical significance. In 8 cadavers, the lead entered the S3 foramen successfully. The median distance of the lead to the nerve did not show a significant difference between both groups (E0: Group A: 0.0 mm vs. Group B: 0.0 mm, p = 0.969; E1: Group A: 0.0 mm vs. Group B: 0.5 mm p = 0.754; E2: Group A: 2.5 mm vs. Group B: 2.5 mm p = 1.000; E3: Group A: 3.5 mm vs. Group B: 4.0 mm p = 0.675). In 2 cases (20%) of the conventional group A, the lead was misplaced and located at the gluteal muscle. Perforation of the presacral fascia was observed in one lead placement in group A and in two placements in group B.
conclusionsBoth standardized implantation techniques may ensure close electrode proximity to the targeted nerve. Misplacement of the electrode was more often observed with the conventional implantation technique.
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.