Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 294–300 | Cite as

Tibial Nerve and Sacral Neuromodulation in the Multiple Sclerosis Patient with Voiding Dysfunction

  • William T. BergEmail author
  • Chris Du
  • Jason Kim
Reconstructed Bladder Function & Dysfunction (M Kaufman, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Reconstructed Bladder Function & Dysfunction


Purpose of Review

Storage and voiding dysfunction are highly prevalent in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Many MS patients fail behavioral modifications and oral medications. Neuromodulation in the form of posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) and sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is a potential treatment for this group of patients. We review contemporary and impactful literature regarding neuromodulation in the MS patient with lower urinary tract dysfunction.

Recent Findings

Large-scale randomized trials regarding the use of neuromodulation in the treatment neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction are limited. Despite this, several small prospective studies demonstrate durable responses to neuromodulation in the MS patient. Posterior tibial nerve trials reveal improvements in urodynamic parameters, incontinence episodes, post-void residual volumes, and quality of life metrics. Additionally, SNM in the MS patient results in improvements in daytime and nighttime frequency, urgency symptom, and quality of life. Currently, the frequent need for routine spinal MRI scans precludes the use of SNM. Limited research suggests that some MRI use may be safe, but investigation in this area is ongoing.


Tibial and sacral neuromodulation appear safe and offer significant improvements in lower urinary tract symptoms and quality of life in MS patients who have failed oral medications and behavioral modifications. Though randomized controlled trials are limited in this area, neuromodulation offers great promise to this often refractory and complex patient population. Future studies are warranted and necessary to better evaluate the efficacy of these treatment options.


Multiple sclerosis Neurogenic voiding dysfunction Neuromodulation Tibial nerve stimulation Sacral neuromodulation 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

William Berg, Chris Du, and Jason Kim declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Gormley EA, Lightner DJ, Faraday M, Vasavada SP, American Urological A. Society of Urodynamics FPM. Diagnosis and treatment of overactive bladder (non-neurogenic) in adults: AUA/SUFU guideline amendment. J Urol. 2015;193(5):1572–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Finazzi-Agro E, Petta F, Sciobica F, Pasqualetti P, Musco S, Bove P. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation effects on detrusor overactivity incontinence are not due to a placebo effect: a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial. J Urol. 2010;184(5):2001–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burton C, Sajja A, Latthe PM. Effectiveness of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation for overactive bladder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31(8):1206–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Siegel S, Noblett K, Mangel J, Griebling TL, Sutherland SE, Bird ET, et al. Results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter study evaluating sacral neuromodulation with InterStim therapy compared to standard medical therapy at 6-months in subjects with mild symptoms of overactive bladder. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(3):224–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hemmett L, Holmes J, Barnes M, Russell N. What drives quality of life in multiple sclerosis? QJM. 2004;97(10):671–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wintner A, Kim MM, Bechis SK, Kreydin EI. Voiding dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Semin Neurol. 2016;36(1):34–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Litwiller SE, Frohman EM, Zimmern PE. Multiple sclerosis and the urologist. J Urol. 1999;161(3):743–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Onal B, Siva A, Buldu I, Demirkesen O, Cetinel B. Voiding dysfunction due to multiple sclerosis: a large scale retrospective analysis. Int Braz J Urol. 2009;35:326–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mathers SE, Ingram DA, Swash M. Electrophysiology of motor pathways for sphincter control in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1990;53(11):955–60.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Amarenco G, Kerdraon J, Denys P. [Bladder and sphincter disorders in multiple sclerosis. Clinical, urodynamic and neurophysiological study of 225 cases]. Rev Neurol (Paris). 1995;151(12):722–30.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Betts CD, D’Mellow MT, Fowler CJ. Urinary symptoms and the neurological features of bladder dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56(3):245–50.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Castel-Lacanal E, Game X, Clanet M, et al. Urinary complications and risk factors in symptomatic multiple sclerosis patients. Study of a cohort of 328 patients. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(1):32–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gallien P, Robineau S, Nicolas B, Le Bot MP, Brissot R, Verin M. Vesicourethral dysfunction and urodynamic findings in multiple sclerosis: a study of 149 cases. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79(3):255–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Giannantoni A, Scivoletto G, Di Stasi SM, Grasso MG, Vespasiani G, Castellano V. Urological dysfunctions and upper urinary tract involvement in multiple sclerosis patients. Neurourol Urodyn. 1998;17(2):89–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cooperberg MR, Stoller ML. Percutaneous neuromodulation. Urol Clin N Am. 2005;32(1):71–8 vii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Motavasseli D, Chesnel C, Charlanes A, Menoux D, Charoenwong F, le Breton F, et al. Adherence to anticholinergic therapy and clean intermittent self-catheterization in patients with multiple sclerosis. Int Neurourol J. 2018;22(2):133–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    • Kabay S, Kabay SC, Yucel M, et al. The clinical and urodynamic results of a 3-month percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis-related neurogenic bladder dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(8):964–8. Prospective study showing urinary symptom improvement after PTNS treatment. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gobbi C, Digesu GA, Khullar V, El Neil S, Caccia G, Zecca C. Percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation as an effective treatment of refractory lower urinary tract symptoms in patients with multiple sclerosis: preliminary data from a multicentre, prospective, open label trial. Mult Scler. 2011;17(12):1514–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    • de Seze M, Raibaut P, Gallien P, et al. Transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation for treatment of the overactive bladder syndrome in multiple sclerosis: results of a multicenter prospective study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(3):306–11. Prospective study showing that effects of TNS wear off 90 days after treatment. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zecca C, Digesu GA, Robshaw P, Puccini F, Khullar V, Tubaro A, et al. Motor and sensory responses after percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation in multiple sclerosis patients with lower urinary tract symptoms treated in daily practice. Eur J Neurol. 2014;21(3):506–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peters KM, Carrico DJ, Wooldridge LS, Miller CJ, MacDiarmid SA. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for the long-term treatment of overactive bladder: 3-year results of the STEP study. J Urol. 2013;189(6):2194–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    •• Canbaz Kabay S, Kabay S, Mestan E, et al. Long term sustained therapeutic effects of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation treatment of neurogenic overactive bladder in multiple sclerosis patients: 12-months results. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(1):104–10. Prospective study showing maintenance therapy leads to sustained urinary symptom relief. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    •• Zecca C, Digesu GA, Robshaw P, Singh A, Elneil S, Gobbi C. Maintenance percutaneous posterior nerve stimulation for refractory lower urinary tract symptoms in patients with multiple sclerosis: an open label, multicenter, prospective study. J Urol. 2014;191(3):697–702. Large prospective study showing that maintenance therapy leads to sustained urinary symptom relief. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Matzel KE, Chartier-Kastler E, Knowles CH, Lehur PA, Muñoz-Duyos A, Ratto C, et al. Sacral neuromodulation: standardized electrode placement technique. Neuromodulation. 2017;20(8):816–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    • Ruud Bosch JL, Groen J. Treatment of refractory urge urinary incontinence with sacral spinal nerve stimulation in multiple sclerosis patients. Lancet. 1996;348(9029):717–9. Pilot study showing that Sacral Neuromodulation leads to improvement of urinary symptoms in the MS patient. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wallace PA, Lane FL, Noblett KL. Sacral nerve neuromodulation in patients with underlying neurologic disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(1):96.e91–5.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chaabane W, Guillotreau J, Castel-Lacanal E, et al. Sacral neuromodulation for treating neurogenic bladder dysfunction: clinical and urodynamic study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(4):547–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Marinkovic SP, Gillen LM. Sacral neuromodulation for multiple sclerosis patients with urinary retention and clean intermittent catheterization. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21(2):223–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Minardi D, Muzzonigro G. Sacral neuromodulation in patients with multiple sclerosis. World J Urol. 2012;30(1):123–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    •• Engeler DS, Meyer D, Abt D, Muller S, Schmid HP. Sacral neuromodulation for the treatment of neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction caused by multiple sclerosis: a single-centre prospective series. BMC Urol. 2015;15:105. Largest SNM prospective study done on MS patients, sustained improvement in urinary symptoms. PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    •• Peters KM, Kandagatla P, Killinger KA, Wolfert C, Boura JA. Clinical outcomes of sacral neuromodulation in patients with neurologic conditions. Urology. 2013;81(4):738–43. Comparative prospective study. Showed patients with neurogenic bladder had the same amount of improvement compared to those with non-neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction when treated with SNM. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kessler TM, La Framboise D, Trelle S, et al. Sacral neuromodulation for neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2010;58(6):865–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Elkelini MS, Hassouna MM. Safety of MRI at 1.5Tesla in patients with implanted sacral nerve neurostimulator. Eur Urol. 2006;50(2):311–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chermansky CJ, Krlin RM, Holley TD, Woo HH, Winters JC. Magnetic resonance imaging following InterStim(R): an institutional experience with imaging safety and patient satisfaction. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(8):1486–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    • Juan M. Guzman-Negron, Javier Pizarro-Berdichevsky, Bradley Gil, Howard B. Goldman. Lumbosacral 1.5 Tesla MRI compatibility with sacral neuromodulation: an in-vivo prospective study. SUFU Abstracts 2018, Winter Meeting. 2018. Prospective study. Demonstrated that MRI had no serious adverse events. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyStony Brook University HospitalStony BrookUSA
  2. 2.School of MedicineStony Brook UniversityStony BrookUSA

Personalised recommendations