ReviewNeurourology and urodynamics2026
Which Patients With Dysfunctional Voiding Respond Well to Sacral Neuromodulation? ICI-RS 2025.
Review in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsDysfunctional voiding (DV) is characterised by fluctuating or intermittent urinary flow during voiding in neurologically normal individuals. Given the different definitions used and heterogeneous pathophysiologies, outcomes following sacral neuromodulation/sacral nerve stimulation (SNM/SNS) are variably reported. The aim was to identify the areas of research required to be able to accurately predict response to SNM/SNS in adults with DV.
methodsThe relevant literature was reviewed by a multidisciplinary panel and the findings were discussed at the ICI-RS meeting held in 2025 in the UK. The outcomes of this discussion are presented.
resultsDV has unique diagnostic features, typically requiring pressure-flow studies and uroflowmetry to establish the diagnosis. Further investigations such as electromyography and urethral pressure profilometry help to better understand the pathophysiology. Phenotyping the lower urinary tract dysfunction helps to identify patterns of abnormalities, and it is likely that certain groups show a better response to SNM/SNS than others, such as in Fowler's syndrome. Older age and change in body weight following implantation are associated with a worse outcome, though not specifically in DV. Studies evaluating the impact of neuropsychiatric co-morbidities on SNM/SNS outcomes show mixed results. Central dysregulation of micturition networks possibly contribute to DV and could represent an additional therapeutic target of SNM.
conclusionPrecise phenotyping of individuals with DV integrating clinical, urodynamic, neurophysiological, and neuropsychiatric factors is essential to predict which adults respond best to SNM/SNS. Future research should focus on establishing criteria for patient selection and designing comprehensive prospective interventional studies to assess efficacy and complications.
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.