Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Surface and boney landmarks for sacral neuromodulation: a cadaveric study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

Standard external landmarks have been suggested as a guide for in-office percutaneous nerve evaluation (PNE), but validity of these landmarks has not been assessed. Our objective was to determine whether the standard 9 cm from the tip of the coccyx indicates the position of the S3 sacral foramen and whether other boney landmarks and measurements improved positioning.

Methods

Measurements and distances between external boney landmarks were obtained in 22 embalmed cadavers. Spinal needles were placed 9 cm superior to the coccyx and 2 cm lateral to midline bilaterally. After dissection, internal measurements relating to sacral length, position of S3, and location of the needle in relation to S3 were recorded. Correlations among measured variables were assessed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Mean distance from the tip of coccyx to S3 was 9.26 cm (±0.84), from S3 to midline 2.30 cm (±0.2); from needle to S3 1.25 cm, and needle placement was as likely to be placed above or below S3; and S2-S3 and S3-S4 interforamenal distance 1.48 cm (±0.30) and 1.48 cm (±0.24), respectively. Mean distance from S3 to sacroiliac joint (SIJ) was shorter than S2 to SIJ. All associations between external measurements and length from tip of coccyx to S3 were not significant.

Conclusion

A distance 9 cm from the tip of the coccyx is a reasonable starting landmark for in-office blind PNE. However, given the variability in coccyx length, caution should be taken; also, sensory-motor response is necessary to confirm proper placement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Matzel KE, Lux P, Heuer S, Besendörfer M, Zhang W (2009) Sacral nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence: long-term outcome. Colorectal Dis 11:636–641

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Schmidt RA, Jonas U, Oleson KA et al (1999) Sacral nerve stimulation for treatment of refractory urinary urge incontinence. Sacral Nerve Stimulation Study Group. J Urol 162:352–357

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hassouna MM, Siegel SW, Nyeholt AA et al (2000) Sacral neuromodulation in the treatment of urgency-frequency symptoms: a multicenter study on efficacy and safety. J Urol 163:1849–1854

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jonas U, Fowler CJ, Chancellor MB et al (2001) Efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation for urinary retention: results 18 months after implantation. J Urol 165:15–19

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Shaker HS, Hassouna MM (1998) Sacral root neuromodulation in idiopathic nonobstructive chronic urinary retention. J Urol 159:1476–1478

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shaker HS, Hassouna MM (1999) Sacral root neuromodulation in the treatment of various voiding and storage problems. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 10:336–343

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Amend B, Khalil M, Kessler TM, Sievert K-D (2011) How does sacral modulation work best? Placement and programming techniques to maximize efficacy. Curr Urol Rep 12:327–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chai TC, Mamo GJ (2001) Modified techniques of S3 foramen localization and lead implantation in S3 neuromodulation. Urology 58:786–790

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Spinelli M, Giardiello G, Gerber M et al (2003) New sacral neuromodulation lead for percutaneous implantation using local anesthesia: description and first experience. J Urol 170:1905–1907

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Williams ER, Siegel SW (2010) Procedural techniques in sacral nerve modulation. Int Urogynecol J 21:S453–S460

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Spinelli M, Sievert K-D (2008) Latest technologic and surgical developments in using InterStim TM therapy for sacral neuromodulation: impact on treatment success and safety. Eur Urol 54:1287–1296

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Buchs NC, Dembe JC, Robert-Yap J, Roche B, Fasel J (2008) Optimizing electrode implantation in sacral nerve stimulation - an anatomical cadaver study controlled by a laparoscopic camera. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:85–91

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hasan ST, Shanahan DA, Pridie AK, Neal DE (1996) Surface localization of sacral foramina for neuromodulation of bladder function. An anatomical study. Eur Urol 29:90–98

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. McCullough MC, Decker S, Ford J et al (2013) Third Sacral Foramina Morphometry for Sacral Neuromodulation. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 19:23–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Saint Clair N, Boyles SH, Clark A et al (2008) The presacral space and its impact on sacral neuromodulator implantation. J Urol 180:988–991

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. O’Haire C, Gibbons P (2000) Inter-examiner and intra-examiner agreement for assessing sacroiliac anatomical landmarks using palpation and observation: pilot study. Man Ther 5:13–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Ryan Newton, PhD, Jonathan Weeks, MD, and Adair Heyl, PhD for their contribution to the preparation of this manuscript. We also thank the individuals who donated their bodies and tissues for the advancement of education and research.

Conflicts of interest

Dr. Francis is a speaker for Astellas Pharma Inc. Dr. Ostergard has provided services in the form of medicolegal consultation and testimony and is a speaker for Astellas Pharma Inc. All other authors have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sean L. Francis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Deveneau, N.E., Greenstein, M., Mahalingashetty, A. et al. Surface and boney landmarks for sacral neuromodulation: a cadaveric study. Int Urogynecol J 26, 263–268 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2504-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-014-2504-9

Keywords

Navigation