Abstract
Purpose of Review
Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is an effective, minimally invasive treatment for refractory overactive bladder, non-obstructive urinary retention, and fecal incontinence. Although the treatment is 80% successful, optimal outcomes over time are achieved only by applying precise surgical technique. In this review, we will present the surgical technique for optimal SNM documented in the literature, as well as provide tips for ideal placement based on the authors’ experience.
Recent Findings
The technique of SNM placement has greatly evolved over the last 10 years with the routine use of fluoroscopy as well as the introduction of the curved, tined lead. With these developments, surgeons have begun to pay more attention to motor thresholds needed to achieve anal bellows and toe flexion responses during staged lead implants. By achieving lower motor thresholds, ideally less than 2 mA, patients have a lower risk of future lead revision and may benefit from longer battery life and greater reprogramming options.
Summary
Ideal lead placement for SNM includes superior medial entry into the S3 foramen, with a lateral curvature of the distal lead to follow the S3 nerve root. Specific fluoroscopic findings, along with low motor thresholds for anal bellows and toe flexion, confirm ideal lead placement. Surgeons should make every effort to achieve the ideal lead. In patients with inadequate response to therapy, the lead can be checked on x-ray for ideal characteristics, and a revision should be considered if there is room for improvement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Liberman D, Ehlert MJ, Siegel SW. Sacral neuromodulation in urological practice. Urology. 2017;99:14–22.
Gormley EA, Lightner DJ, Faraday M, Vasavada SP. Diagnosis and treatment of overactive bladder (non-neurogenic) in adults: AUA/SUFU guideline amendment. J Urol. 2015;193(5):1572–80.
Tanagho EA, Schmidt RA. Electrical stimulation in the clinical management of the neurogenic bladder. J Urol. 1988;140(6):1331–9.
Amend B, Matzel KE, Abrams P, de Groat WC, Sievert K-D. How does neuromodulation work. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(5):762–5.
Spinelli M, Giardiello G, Gerber M, Arduini A, van den Hombergh U, Malaguti S. New sacral neuromodulation lead for percutaneous implantation using local anesthesia: description and first experience. J Urol. 2003;170(5):1905–7.
• Goldman HB, Lloyd JC, Noblett KL, Carey MP, Castaño Botero JC, Gajewski JB, et al. International continence society best practice statement for use of sacral neuromodulation. Neurourol Urodyn. 2018;37(5):1823–48. These guidelines provide clinicians with appropriate, standardized use of SNM.
El-Azab AS, Siegel SW. Specific tips for general controversies in sacral neuromodulation. Curr Urol Rep [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2019 May 11]; 17(11). Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11934-016-0640-0
• Borawski KM, Foster RT, Webster GD, Amundsen CL. Predicting implantation with a neuromodulator using two different test stimulation techniques: a prospective randomized study in urge incontinent women. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26(1):14–8. This randomized study highlighted the use of staged lead placement over peripheral nerve evaluation.
Spinelli M, Weil E, Ostardo E, Del Popolo G, Ruiz-Cerdá JL, Kiss G, et al. New tined lead electrode in sacral neuromodulation: experience from a multicentre European study. World J Urol. 2005;23(3):225–9.
Marcelissen T, Leong R, Serroyen J, van Kerrebroeck P, de Wachter S. Is the screening method of sacral neuromodulation a prognostic factor for long-term success? J Urol. 2011;185(2):583–7.
•• Pizarro-Berdichevsky J, Gill BC, Clifton M, Okafor HT, Faris AE, Vasavada SP, et al. Motor response matters: optimizing lead placement improves sacral neuromodulation outcomes. J Urol. 2018;199(4):1032–6. This paper demonstrates the importance of precise lead placement in SNM outcomes as related to need for revision.
Schmidt RA, Senn E, Tanagho EA. Functional evaluation of sacral nerve root integrity. Report of a technique. Urology. 1990;35(5):388–92.
Matzel KE, Chartier-Kastler E, Knowles CH, Lehur PA, Muñoz-Duyos A, Ratto C, et al. Sacral neuromodulation: standardized electrode placement technique. Neuromodulation J Int Neuromodulation Soc. 2017;20(8):816–24.
Scheepens WA, Weil EH, van Koeveringe GA, Rohrmann D, Hedlund HE, Schurch B, et al. Buttock placement of the implantable pulse generator: a new implantation technique for sacral neuromodulation--a multicenter study. Eur Urol. 2001;40(4):434–8.
Hijaz A, Vasavada SP, Daneshgari F, Frinjari H, Goldman H, Rackley R. Complications and troubleshooting of two-stage sacral neuromodulation therapy: a single-institution experience. Urology. 2006;68(3):533–7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors 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.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Overactive Bladder
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ghamarian, P.P., Moskowitz, D. Intraoperative Tips and Tricks for Successful Sacral Neuromodulation. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 14, 191–196 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-019-00522-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-019-00522-x