Sacral Neuromodulation for Anorectal Dysfunction

2020 ◽  
pp. 469-475
Author(s):  
Klaus E. Matzel ◽  
Birgit Bittorf
2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 889-890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ugo Grossi ◽  
Emma V. Carrington ◽  
S Mark Scott ◽  
Charles H. Knowles

2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 454-454
Author(s):  
Nasim Zabihi ◽  
Daniel Silverman ◽  
Veronica Triaca ◽  
Christian O. Twiss ◽  
Cheri Geist ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 26-27
Author(s):  
Dennis H. Kim ◽  
Jocelyn M. Rieder ◽  
Eugene Y. Rhee ◽  
Shawn A. Menefee ◽  
Michael H. Ree ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 175 (4S) ◽  
pp. 289-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Humphrey Atiemo ◽  
Ashwin A. Vaze ◽  
Courtenay K. Moore ◽  
Michael Aleman ◽  
Joseph Abdelmalak ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Thomas C. Dudding ◽  
Paul A. Lehur ◽  
Michael Sørensen ◽  
Stefan Engelberg ◽  
Maria Paola Bertapelle ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175628722199813
Author(s):  
Mai Ahmed Banakhar

Objective: To study the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on sacral neuromodulation (SNM) implanted patients and examine patient concerns. Methodology: A web-based survey was sent to all SNM patients, including those with implants and who had a cancelled operation because of the pandemic. The survey consisted of 15 questions in Arabic language, which sought to evaluate outcomes, as well as patient concerns and preferences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: A total of 66 patients were contacted, and of which, 62 replied. Most of the patients ( n = 51; 82.3%) had the device implanted, and 11 (17.7%) patients had a postponed operation secondary to the pandemic. There were 20 males and 42 females. The mean age was 34 years ± SD 16.5 (9–62 years). Indications for sacral neuromodulation therapy were refractory overactive bladder OAB 35 (56.5%), retention 17 (27.4%), OAB + retention 3 (4.8%). When questioning the effect of the lockdown on patients, most reported no effect (43.5%), while 14.5% had some programming difficulties. The patients preferred telephone calls for device emergencies and clinic follow-up with 88.7% and 98.4%, respectively. Most patients had no concerns regarding their Interstim device during the pandemic and found it manageable; 8.1% had insurance concerns due to the economic changes. Conclusion: Patients with implanted SNM for lower urinary tract symptoms were mainly concerned with device programming. Telemedicine is a great solution for continuous care in this group.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document