ArticleNeurourology and urodynamics2026
Adaptive Pudendal Nerve Stimulation: A Pilot Study on Safety, Technical Feasibility, and Clinical Effect.
Article in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05241379 (Exploratory Safety and Electrophysiological Study of Closed-loop Pudendal Neuromodulation Using an Implantable), which is not on this 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.
Exploratory Safety and Electrophysiological Study of Closed-loop Pudendal Neuromodulation Using an Implantable (Picostim-DyNeuMo) Device in Women With Urinary Incontinence
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the safety, procedural feasibility, and pilot clinical outcomes for a new implanted device delivering adaptive pudendal nerve stimulation. MATERIALS AND
methodsThirteen adult women with treatment-refractory mixed (n = 8) or urge (n = 5) urinary incontinence were implanted with a Picostim-DyNeuMo system incorporating an implantable pulse generator and two quadripolar electrode leads. Leads were placed at the trunk and anterior part of the same pudendal nerve with radiological and electrophysiological guidance. Monophasic (pulse duration: 200 µs) stimulation at 15 Hz could be transiently adapted to 40 Hz by an embedded inertial detector (tapping over the device). Outcomes at 6 months included: safety (primary outcome), surgical feasibility, physiological (inc. urodynamic testing), and pilot clinical efficacy (voiding diaries; questionnaires).
resultsPatients were implanted with two leads without technical difficulties. Reported adverse events (including one expected serious adverse device event) and device deficiencies were transient or resolved with intervention. Mean daily incontinence episodes decreased from 5.7 ± 2.8 at baseline to 1.8 ± 2.9 at 6 months. Eight patients were responders (> 50% improvement), with five regaining full continence by the final follow-up visit. All patients reported symptom improvement (PGI-I score) and clinically meaningful improvements in quality of life (ICIQ-OAB-QoL and ICIQ-UI-SF). Seventy percent of patients used the tap function to adapt therapy on a daily basis. Stimulation during awake urodynamics at 6 months showed significant increases in mean maximum cystometric capacity from baseline with basal stimulation and further increments during adaptive stimulation.
conclusionsPudendal nerve stimulation using the Picostim-DyNeuMo system is safe and technically feasible. CLINICAL
trial registrationNCT05241379.
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.