Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38765538›Full record

ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2024

Sacral neuromodulation therapy for urinary and defecatory disorders: experience in a Latin American public hospital.

Marcelo Mass-Lindenbaum, Diego Arévalo-Vega, Isidora Aleuanlli, Fernanda Santis-Moya, Andrea Maluenda, Eitan Dines, Miriam Cohen-Vaizer, Álvaro Saavedra, Trinidad Raby, Bernardita Blumel and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Marcelo Mass-LindenbaumCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1027-8412
Diego Arévalo-VegaCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8864-1555
Isidora AleuanlliPontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Departamento de Ginecología Facultad de Medicina Santiago Chile Departamento de Ginecología, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6411-3037
Fernanda Santis-MoyaCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5250-3203
Andrea MaluendaCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7390-3006
Eitan DinesCorporación de Innovación en Piso Pélvico Santiago Chile Corporación de Innovación en Piso Pélvico, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2392-6864
Miriam Cohen-VaizerUniversidad de Chile Facultad de Medicina Santiago Chile Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5878-4213
Álvaro SaavedraCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7629-2252
Trinidad RabyCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6237-2772
Bernardita BlumelCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4970-1444
Rodrigo CuevasCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5980-1908
Simone PohlhammerCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7477-9019
Gabriela AlarconCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0343-8115
Marco Arellano AlbornozCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7493-8331
Javier Pizarro-BerdichevskyCentro de innovación en Piso Pélvico Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río Santiago Chile Centro de innovación en Piso Pélvico, Hospital Dr. Sótero del Río, Santiago, Chile.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8614-4480

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To show the experience of a Latin American public hospital, with SNM in the management of either OAB, NOUR or FI, reporting feasibility, short to medium-term success rates, and complications. Methods: A retrospective cohort was conducted using data collected prospectively from patients with urogynecological conditions and referred from colorectal surgery and urology services between 2015 and 2022. Results: Advanced or basic trial phases were performed on 35 patients, 33 (94%) of which were successful and opted to move on Implantable Pulse Generator (GG) implantation. The average follow-up time after definitive implantation was 82 months (SD 59). Of the 33 patients undergoing, 27 (81%)reported an improvement of 50% or more in their symptoms at last follow-up. Moreover, 30 patients (90%) with a definitive implant reported subjective improvement, with an average PGI-I "much better" and 9 of them reporting to be "excellent" on PGI-I. Conclusion: SNM is a feasible and effective treatment for pelvic floor dysfunction. Its implementation requires highly trained groups and innovative leadership. At a nation-wide level, greater diffusion of this therapy among professionals is needed to achieve timely referral of patients who require it.

Indexed as

Electric Stimulation TherapyHospitals, PublicAdultAgedFeasibility StudiesFecal IncontinenceFemaleHumansLatin AmericaMiddle AgedPelvic Floor DisordersRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeElectric stimulation therapyFecal incontinenceIncontinenceNon-obstructive urinary retentionoveractiveSacral neuromodulationUrinary bladder

Identifiers

PMID38765538
PMCPMC11075388

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.