International Urology and Nephrology

, Volume 47, Issue 3, pp 451–455 | Cite as

The possible role of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation using adhesive skin surface electrodes in patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity secondary to spinal cord injury

Urology - Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the effectiveness of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) using adhesive skin surface electrodes versus solifenacin succinate (SS) in patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) secondary to spinal cord injury (SCI).

Methods

A randomized controlled study involving 100 patients with NDO secondary to SCI was conducted. Patients were randomized into two groups. In group A, patients received PTNS using adhesive skin surface electrodes for 4 weeks. In group B, patients underwent SS treatment for 4 weeks. Bladder diaries and incontinence quality of life questionnaire were reviewed before treatment and 2 and 4 weeks after treatment.

Results

Improvement in all bladder diary parameters was statistically significant within each group 2 and 4 weeks after treatment compared to baseline (p < 0.05), but did not reach statistical significance between the PTNS and SS groups (p > 0.05). Compared to SS, PTNS was not associated with any unanticipated adverse events.

Conclusions

PTNS therapy with adhesive skin surface electrodes is an effective method to treat NDO secondary to SCI. This therapy is not only no difference comparing to SS therapy but also noninvasive and easily managed by patients.

Keywords

Neurogenic detrusor overactivity Spinal cord injury Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation Solifenacin Succinate Surface electrodes 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by China National Technology R&G Program, No. 2012BAI34B02. All experiments were performed at the department of urology of the China Rehabilitation Research Center, Beijing, China. The authors would like to express special thanks to Mr. Chen Jian for technical support and Dr. Ju Lu for the valuable discussions.

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Sahai A, Cortes E, Seth J et al (2011) Neurogenic detrusor overactivity in patients with spinal cord injury: evaluation and management. Curr Urol Rep 12:404–412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    del Popolo G, Mencarini M, Nelli F et al (2012) Controversy over the pharmacological treatments of storage symptoms in spinal cord injury patients: a literature overview. Spinal Cord 50:8–13CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burton C, Sajja A, Latthe PM (2012) Effectiveness of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation for overactive bladder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurourol Urodyn 31:1206–1216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vecchioli-Scaldazza C, Morosetti C, Berouz A et al (2013) Solifenacin succinate versus percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation in women with overactive bladder syndrome: results of a randomized controlled crossover study. Gynecol Obstet Invest 75:230–234CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schäfer W, Abrams P, Liao L et al (2002) Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies. Neurourol Urodyn 21:261–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maynard FM Jr, Bracken MB, Creasey G et al (1997) International standards for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury American spinal injury association. Spinal Cord 35:266–274CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M et al (2002) The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 21:167–178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaziev G, Topazio L, Iacovelli V et al (2013) Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) efficacy in the treatment of lower urinary tract dysfunctions: a systematic review. BMC Urol 13:61–71CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schurch B, Denys P, Kozma CM et al (2007) Reliability and validity of the incontinence quality of life questionnaire in patients with neurogenic urinary incontinence. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 88:646–652CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krebs J, Pannek J (2013) Effects of solifenacin in patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity as a result of spinal cord lesion. Spinal Cord 51:306–309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Groen J, Bosch JL (2001) Neuromodulation techniques in the treatment of the overactive bladder. BJU Int 87:723–731CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burks FN, Bui DT, Peters KM (2010) Neuromodulation and the neurogenic bladder. Urol Clin N Am 37:559–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhang EJSC, Horwinski ER, Lytton B (1983) Treatment of motor and sensory detrusor instability by electrical stimulation. J Urol 129:78–79PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Seze M, Raibaut P, Gallien P (2011) Transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation for treatment of the overactive bladder syndrome in multiple sclerosis: results from a multicenter prospective study. Neurourol Urodyn 30:306–311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyChina Rehabilitation Research CenterBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of UrologyCapital Medical UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.Neural Electro-Mechanics Center, Chongqing Institute of Green and Intelligent Technology (CIGIT)Chinese Academy of ScienceChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations