ArticleBladder (San Francisco, Calif.)2022
Safety and Effectiveness of Nustim System Implantation in Dogs.
Article in Bladder (San Francisco, Calif.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Tissue-Coupled Powering for Battery-Free Injectable Electroceuticals.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Implantable electrical stimulation device enhances pelvic floor tissue repair and reduces collagen over-degradation in rats with stress urinary incontinence.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A potential therapeutic strategy using a miniature, implantable, wireless nerve stimulation device for treating stress urinary incontinence in rats.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To verify the safety and effectiveness of a novel micro-implantable wireless nerve stimulation device in healthy adult beagles and evaluate the feasibility of using the device in clinical practice. Methods: The stimulator was experimentally implanted into the quadriceps femoris of three adult beagles. The animals were subjected to training on daily basis for 14 days, and the threshold test was administered once a week. At the end, we analyzed the images of light microscopy and electron microscopy. Results: The implantation was easy to perform and the whole stimulation system worked stably and reliably. The stimulation threshold was stable. During the process, the stimulator did not move or cause damage to adjacent tissues. The whole system showed a good biocompatibility with recipient animals. The stimulator could induce muscular contraction and enhance the motor function of muscles. Conclusions: The preliminary results showed that the stimulator could be safely implanted into animal body, with good tissue compatibility, stability and reliability. In addition, it also worked well in eliciting muscle contraction. It promises to be used for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in future.
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.