Sacral nerve electric stimulation is more effective than magnetic stimulation in treating patients with refractory neurogenic bladder
10.3760/cma.j.cn421666-20240813-00652
- VernacularTitle:骶神经植入式电刺激与骶神经磁刺激治疗难治性神经源性膀胱的疗效对比
- Author:
Yawen ZHENG
1
;
Qiang WANG
1
;
Yuanyuan HOU
1
;
Jie DONG
1
;
Hao LI
1
;
Jiang LI
1
;
Yongxiang ZHANG
1
Author Information
1. 青岛大学附属医院康复医学科，青岛 266003
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Sacral nerve stimulation;
Neuromodulation;
Magnetic stimulation;
Neurogenic bladder;
Spinal cord injury
- From:
Chinese Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
2025;47(5):430-435
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the effectiveness of sacral nerve electric stimulation (SNES) and sacral nerve magnetic stimulation (SNMS) in treating patients with refractory neurogenic bladder (NB).Methods:Forty-six patients with NB after a spinal cord or cauda equina injury were randomly divided into an SNMS group and an SNES group, each of 23. In addition to basic bladder intervention, the SNMS group was treated with SNMS in the sacral 3 (S3) nerve root area once a day for 21 minutes, 5 days a week for 4 weeks. The SNES group received 24h uninterrupted SNES treatment for 4 consecutive weeks. The bladder pressure-volume assessment indexes, voiding diary indexes, and scores on the Chinese version of the Simplified Health Assessment Scale (SF-Qualiveen) were compared between the two groups before and after 4 weeks of treatment.Results:After the treatment, the safe bladder capacity, average daily number of micturitions, average daily single micturition volume, average daily single maximum micturition volume, average daily number of catheterizations, and average daily single maximum catheterization volume of both groups had improved significantly. After the treatment, the maximum intravesical pressure of the bladder (storage period), bladder compliance, average daily single catheterization volume, and SF-Qua-liveen scores of the SNES group had improved significantly. And that group′s average safe bladder capacity, bladder compliance, daily number of micturitions and average daily single catheterization volume were significantly better than the SNMS group′s averages. The SNES group′s average maximum intravesical bladder pressure and average SF-Qualiveen score were also significantly better.Conclusion:Both SNMS and SNES can improve urine storage and voiding for those with refractory NB in the short term, but SNES is clinically more effective and better improves patients′ life quality.
