Jens Wöllner

Treatment efficacy and outcomes using a third generation shockwave lithotripter

To evaluate the clinical efficiency of a third generation electromagnetic shock wave lithotripter, the Lithoskop® (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany), regarding outcomes, stone disintegration, retreatment and complication rates. To compare the results of the Lithoskop with other currently available systems and the reference standard lithotripter, the HM‐3 (Dornier MedTech Europe GmbH, Wessling, Germany).

Surgery Illustrated – surgical atlas sacral neuromodulation.

Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) was developed in the early 1980s by Tanagho and Schmidt [ 1 ] and has become a well-established and widely accepted treatment for patients with refractory lower urinary tract dysfunction [ 2 – 5 ] , i.e. urgency-frequency syndrome, urgency incontinence, and chronic urinary retention, and also for patients with bowel dysfunction [ 6 ] , e.g. faecal incontinence and constipation. Although the mechanism of action of SNM is not well understood, it seems to involve modulation of spinal cord refl exes and brain networks by peripheral afferents, rather than direct stimulation of the motor response of the detrusor or urethral sphincter [ 7 ] . Even the pelvic fl oor contraction (the bellows response) that is used to monitor SNM lead placement is not a direct stimulation effect, but rather is an afferent-mediated response [ 8 ] . For this reason, ‘ SNM ’ rather than ‘ sacral nerve stimulation ’ is now the preferred term for this therapy.

Acute Spinal Cord Injury—Do Ambulatory Patients Need Urodynamic Investigations?

PURPOSE We compared the urodynamic parameters of ambulatory vs nonambulatory acute spinal cord injured patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 27 women and 33 men (mean age 58 years) with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction due to acute spinal cord injury (duration of injury less than 40 days) were prospectively evaluated. The patients were dichotomized according to the mobility for moderate distances subscale of the SCIM (Spinal Cord Independence Measure) version III into ambulatory (score of 3 or greater) and nonambulatory (score less than 3). Videourodynamic parameters including maximum detrusor pressure during the storage phase, bladder compliance, detrusor overactivity, detrusor external sphincter dyssynergia and vesicoureterorenal reflux were compared between the groups. RESULTS Of the 60 patients with acute spinal cord injury 17 were ambulatory and 43 were nonambulatory. Mean ± SD duration of injury at urodynamic investigation was 30 ± 8 days. The lesion level was cervical in 14 patients, thoracic in 28 and lumbar/sacral in 18. Comparing unfavorable urodynamic parameters, no significant differences were found between ambulatory vs nonambulatory patients in terms of a high pressure system during the storage phase (29% vs 33%, p = 0.81), a low compliance bladder (12% vs 7%, p = 0.54), detrusor overactivity (24% vs 47%, p = 0.1), detrusor external sphincter dyssynergia (18% vs 21%, p = 0.77) and vesicoureterorenal reflux (0% vs 5%, p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS Ambulatory and nonambulatory patients with acute spinal cord injury have a similar risk of unfavorable urodynamic measures. Thus, we strongly recommend the same neurourological assessment including urodynamic investigations in all acute spinal cord injury patients independent of the ability to walk.

Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction—Do We Need Same Session Repeat Urodynamic Investigations?

PURPOSE We investigated whether same session repeat urodynamic investigations are needed in patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS A consecutive series of 226 patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction who underwent same session repeat urodynamic investigation was prospectively investigated at a single university spinal cord injury center. Urodynamics were done according to the good urodynamic practices recommended by the International Continence Society. All 226 patients underwent same session repeat consecutive filling cystometry and 88 also underwent pressure flow studies if they could void spontaneously. Repeatability of the 2 measurements was assessed using the Bland and Altman 95% limits of agreement, and the κ statistic. RESULTS Mean age of the 226 patients enrolled was 52 years (range 18 to 90). Of the patients 94 (42%) were women and 132 were (58%) men. Detrusor overactivity repeatability was excellent between the 2 urodynamic investigations (κ=0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.94). For all other urodynamic parameters assessed there were wide 95% limits of agreement for differences in the parameters, indicating poor repeatability. CONCLUSIONS In same session repeat urodynamic investigations of patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction detrusor overactivity demonstrates excellent repeatability but all other urodynamic parameters show insufficient agreement. Thus, we strongly recommend that clinical decision making not be based on a single urodynamic investigation since repeat measurements may yield completely different results.

Botulinum toxin injections into the detrusor.

Overactive bladder syndrome (OAB), characterized by urgency, with or without urgency incontinence, usually with frequency and nocturia [ 1 ] , is highly prevalent, affects the life of millions of people worldwide, and also imposes a substantial economic burden for every healthcare system, as direct annual costs are comparable to those of other chronic diseases such as dementia and diabetes mellitus [ 2 ] . Antimuscarinics are the pharmacological treatment of choice for OAB. However, the effectiveness is limited and many patients discontinue treatment due to adverse events. In 2000, Schurch et al . [ 3, 4 ] fi rst published on the use of botulinum toxin injections into the detrusor for treating neurogenic detrusor overactivity in patients with spinal cord injury. Since then, intradetrusor botulinum toxin injections have become a well-established and widely accepted therapy for refractory neurogenic and non-neurogenic OAB, with or without urodynamically confi rmed detrusor overactivity [ 5, 6 ] . Although botulinum toxin injections into the detrusor is a highly effective, minimally invasive, and generally well-tolerated treatment that improves health-related quality of life (HRQL), the use of botulinum toxin in the lower urinary tract remains unlicensed in most countries.

Sensory Evoked Potentials of the Human Lower Urinary Tract

PURPOSE We investigated the feasibility and reliability of recording sensory evoked potentials after lower urinary tract electrical stimulation. Sensory evoked potentials might reveal improved insights into afferent processing in specific locations of the human lower urinary tract. MATERIALS AND METHODS Electrical stimulation (0.5 and 3 Hz) was applied to the bladder dome and trigone, and the proximal and distal urethra using a transurethral catheter. Cortical sensory evoked potentials were recorded at the Cz electrode with reference to the Fz electrode. All measurements were repeated 3 times for reliability assessment using the ICC. RESULTS Ten healthy female subjects with a mean ± SD age of 23 ± 4 years and a mean height of 168 ± 6 cm were included in the study. The most prominent, consistent sensory evoked potential landmark across different locations was the first negative peak. In all subjects after 0.5 Hz stimulation, the first negative peak was reliably recorded at a mean of 128.8 ± 23.8, 141.9 ± 51.5, 133.1 ± 32.1 and 132.5 ± 33.6 milliseconds (ICC 0.88, 0.83, 0.90 and 0.81) at the bladder dome, trigone, proximal and distal urethra, respectively. After 3 Hz stimulation, no reliable sensory evoked potentials could be recorded. CONCLUSIONS Sensory evoked potentials can be reliably recorded from different lower urinary tract locations after 0.5 Hz stimulation with a characteristic negativity at about 130 milliseconds. These latencies are compatible with a conduction velocity in the range of 3 to 10 m per second, corresponding to transmission by A-δ fibers. The inability to retrieve reliable responses at 3 Hz stimulation might potentially be related to less involvement of fast conduction fibers, ie A-β, in afferent sensation along the human lower urinary tract. The value of a more distinct diagnosis of sensory sensation in lower urinary tract disorders must be evaluated in further studies.

External Urethral Sphincter Pressure Measurement: An Accurate Method for the Diagnosis of Detrusor External Sphincter Dyssynergia?

Background Combined pelvic floor electromyography (EMG) and videocystourethrography (VCUG) during urodynamic investigation are the most acceptable and widely agreed methods for diagnosing detrusor external sphincter dyssynergia (DESD). Theoretically, external urethral sphincter pressure (EUSP) measurement would provide enough information for the diagnosis of DESD and could simplify the urodynamic investigation replacing combined pelvic floor EMG and VCUG. Thus, we evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of EUSP measurement for DESD. Patients & Methods A consecutive series of 72 patients (36 women, 36 men) with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction able to void spontaneously was prospectively evaluated at a single university spinal cord injury center. Diagnosis of DESD using EUSP measurement (index test) versus combined pelvic floor EMG and VCUG (reference standard) was assessed according to the recommendations of the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Initiative. Results Using EUSP measurement (index test) and combined pelvic floor EMG and VCUR (reference standard), DESD was diagnosed in 10 (14%) and in 41 (57%) patients, respectively. More than half of the patients presented discordant diagnosis between the index test and the reference standard. Among 41 patients with DESD diagnosed by combined pelvic floor EMG and VCUR, EUSP measurement identified only 6 patients. EUSP measurement had a sensitivity of 15% (95% CI 5%–25%), specificity of 87% (95% CI 76%–98%), positive predictive value of 60% (95% CI 30%–90%), and negative predictive value of 56% (95% CI 44%–68%) for the diagnosis of DESD. Conclusions For diagnosis of DESD, EUSP measurement is inaccurate and cannot replace combined pelvic floor EMG and VCUR.

Is there a direct antimicrobial effect of botulinum neurotoxin type A

Study Type – Therapy (case series)

Sakrale Neuromodulation bei neurogenen Blasenfunktionsstörungen

ZusammenfassungDie sakrale Neuromodulation (SNM) stellt bei therapierefraktären neurogenen Blasenfunktionsstörungen eine vielversprechende Therapieoption dar. Es bleibt allerdings zu zeigen, welche Typen der neurogenen Blasenfunktionsstörungen und welche zugrunde liegenden neurologischen Erkrankungen am besten auf die SNM ansprechen. Die SNM wurde ständig weiterentwickelt und ist heute ein minimal-invasives, in Lokalanästhesie durchführbares Therapieverfahren, das vor größeren rekonstruktiven Eingriffen zumindest erwogen werden sollte. Es wird eine Elektrodenimplantation ins Sakralforamen S3 oder S4 durchgeführt und in einer Testphase über Tage bis Wochen unter Führen eines Blasentagebuches geprüft, ob die SNM dem Patienten einen relevanten Nutzen bringt. Wenn sich eine positive Testphase zeigt, wird der Neuromodulator gluteal (oder seltener in die Bauchdecke) implantiert.Der Wirkmechanismus der SNM ist nicht gänzlich geklärt, doch Afferenzen dürften eine Schlüsselrolle spielen. So scheint die SNM via periphere Afferenzen eine Modulation von Rückenmarkreflexen und Gehirnzentren zu bewirken. Das implantierte Neuromodulationssystem führt zu keiner Einschränkung der Aktivitäten der Patienten. Allerdings gilt es zu beachten, dass bei Neuromodulatorträgern Hochfrequenzwärmetherapie und unipolare Elektrokauterisation kontraindiziert sind, dass bei einer extrakorporellen Stoßwellenlithotripsie der Brennpunkt nicht in unmittelbarer Nähe des Neuromodulators oder der Elektrode liegen darf, dass Ultrasonographie und Strahlentherapie im Bereich der Implantatkomponenten vermieden werden sollten, dass bei Schwangerschaft der Neuromodulator auszuschalten ist und dass MR-Untersuchungen nur bei zwingender Indikation und bei ausgeschaltetem Neuromodulator durchgeführt werden sollen.AbstractSacral neuromodulation (SNM) represents a promising option for managing treatment-refractory neurogenic bladder dysfunction. It remains to be seen, however, which types of neurogenic bladder dysfunction and which underlying neurological disorders best respond to SNM. Constant improvements in SNM have been achieved and it is now a minimally invasive approach performed under local anesthesia which should be considered before undertaking larger reconstructive procedures. An electrode is implanted in the S3 or S4 sacral foramen and during a test phase lasting for days to weeks the patient keeps a bladder diary to determine whether SNM has provided a relevant benefit. If the results of the test phase are positive, a neuromodulator is implanted in the gluteal area (or more rarely in the abdominal wall).The mechanism of action of SNM has not been completely clarified, but the afferent nerves most likely play a key role. It appears that SNM produces a modulation of medullary reflexes and brain centers by peripheral afferents. The implanted neuromodulation system does not lead to limitation of the patient’s activities. However, it should be noted that high-frequency diathermy and unipolar electrocauterization are contraindicated in patients with neuromodulators, that during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy the focal point should not be in the direct vicinity of the neuromodulator or the electrode, that ultrasound and radiotherapy in the region of the implanted components should be avoided, that the neuromodulation should be discontinued in pregnancy, and that MRI examinations should only be conducted when urgently indicated and the neuromodulator is turned off.Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) represents a promising option for managing treatment-refractory neurogenic bladder dysfunction. It remains to be seen, however, which types of neurogenic bladder dysfunction and which underlying neurological disorders best respond to SNM. Constant improvements in SNM have been achieved and it is now a minimally invasive approach performed under local anesthesia which should be considered before undertaking larger reconstructive procedures. An electrode is implanted in the S3 or S4 sacral foramen and during a test phase lasting for days to weeks the patient keeps a bladder diary to determine whether SNM has provided a relevant benefit. If the results of the test phase are positive, a neuromodulator is implanted in the gluteal area (or more rarely in the abdominal wall).The mechanism of action of SNM has not been completely clarified, but the afferent nerves most likely play a key role. It appears that SNM produces a modulation of medullary reflexes and brain centers by peripheral afferents. The implanted neuromodulation system does not lead to limitation of the patients activities. However, it should be noted that high-frequency diathermy and unipolar electrocauterization are contraindicated in patients with neuromodulators, that during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy the focal point should not be in the direct vicinity of the neuromodulator or the electrode, that ultrasound and radiotherapy in the region of the implanted components should be avoided, that the neuromodulation should be discontinued in pregnancy, and that MRI examinations should only be conducted when urgently indicated and the neuromodulator is turned off.

Sacral neuromodulation for neurogenic bladder dysfunction

ZusammenfassungDie sakrale Neuromodulation (SNM) stellt bei therapierefraktären neurogenen Blasenfunktionsstörungen eine vielversprechende Therapieoption dar. Es bleibt allerdings zu zeigen, welche Typen der neurogenen Blasenfunktionsstörungen und welche zugrunde liegenden neurologischen Erkrankungen am besten auf die SNM ansprechen. Die SNM wurde ständig weiterentwickelt und ist heute ein minimal-invasives, in Lokalanästhesie durchführbares Therapieverfahren, das vor größeren rekonstruktiven Eingriffen zumindest erwogen werden sollte. Es wird eine Elektrodenimplantation ins Sakralforamen S3 oder S4 durchgeführt und in einer Testphase über Tage bis Wochen unter Führen eines Blasentagebuches geprüft, ob die SNM dem Patienten einen relevanten Nutzen bringt. Wenn sich eine positive Testphase zeigt, wird der Neuromodulator gluteal (oder seltener in die Bauchdecke) implantiert.Der Wirkmechanismus der SNM ist nicht gänzlich geklärt, doch Afferenzen dürften eine Schlüsselrolle spielen. So scheint die SNM via periphere Afferenzen eine Modulation von Rückenmarkreflexen und Gehirnzentren zu bewirken. Das implantierte Neuromodulationssystem führt zu keiner Einschränkung der Aktivitäten der Patienten. Allerdings gilt es zu beachten, dass bei Neuromodulatorträgern Hochfrequenzwärmetherapie und unipolare Elektrokauterisation kontraindiziert sind, dass bei einer extrakorporellen Stoßwellenlithotripsie der Brennpunkt nicht in unmittelbarer Nähe des Neuromodulators oder der Elektrode liegen darf, dass Ultrasonographie und Strahlentherapie im Bereich der Implantatkomponenten vermieden werden sollten, dass bei Schwangerschaft der Neuromodulator auszuschalten ist und dass MR-Untersuchungen nur bei zwingender Indikation und bei ausgeschaltetem Neuromodulator durchgeführt werden sollen.AbstractSacral neuromodulation (SNM) represents a promising option for managing treatment-refractory neurogenic bladder dysfunction. It remains to be seen, however, which types of neurogenic bladder dysfunction and which underlying neurological disorders best respond to SNM. Constant improvements in SNM have been achieved and it is now a minimally invasive approach performed under local anesthesia which should be considered before undertaking larger reconstructive procedures. An electrode is implanted in the S3 or S4 sacral foramen and during a test phase lasting for days to weeks the patient keeps a bladder diary to determine whether SNM has provided a relevant benefit. If the results of the test phase are positive, a neuromodulator is implanted in the gluteal area (or more rarely in the abdominal wall).The mechanism of action of SNM has not been completely clarified, but the afferent nerves most likely play a key role. It appears that SNM produces a modulation of medullary reflexes and brain centers by peripheral afferents. The implanted neuromodulation system does not lead to limitation of the patient’s activities. However, it should be noted that high-frequency diathermy and unipolar electrocauterization are contraindicated in patients with neuromodulators, that during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy the focal point should not be in the direct vicinity of the neuromodulator or the electrode, that ultrasound and radiotherapy in the region of the implanted components should be avoided, that the neuromodulation should be discontinued in pregnancy, and that MRI examinations should only be conducted when urgently indicated and the neuromodulator is turned off.Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) represents a promising option for managing treatment-refractory neurogenic bladder dysfunction. It remains to be seen, however, which types of neurogenic bladder dysfunction and which underlying neurological disorders best respond to SNM. Constant improvements in SNM have been achieved and it is now a minimally invasive approach performed under local anesthesia which should be considered before undertaking larger reconstructive procedures. An electrode is implanted in the S3 or S4 sacral foramen and during a test phase lasting for days to weeks the patient keeps a bladder diary to determine whether SNM has provided a relevant benefit. If the results of the test phase are positive, a neuromodulator is implanted in the gluteal area (or more rarely in the abdominal wall).The mechanism of action of SNM has not been completely clarified, but the afferent nerves most likely play a key role. It appears that SNM produces a modulation of medullary reflexes and brain centers by peripheral afferents. The implanted neuromodulation system does not lead to limitation of the patients activities. However, it should be noted that high-frequency diathermy and unipolar electrocauterization are contraindicated in patients with neuromodulators, that during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy the focal point should not be in the direct vicinity of the neuromodulator or the electrode, that ultrasound and radiotherapy in the region of the implanted components should be avoided, that the neuromodulation should be discontinued in pregnancy, and that MRI examinations should only be conducted when urgently indicated and the neuromodulator is turned off.