Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
64 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2002-05-31
2009-07-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Ambulatory Urodynamic Evaluation of Sacral Neuromodulation for Non-Obstructive Urinary Retention
NCT00970242
Sacral Neuromodulation Test With Bilateral First Stage Tined Lead Procedure in Patients With Non-obstructive Urinary Retention: A Pilot Study
NCT00878176
Standardization of Lead Placement for Sacral Neuromodulation. Part 1
NCT03194425
Sacral Neuromodulation & Urodynamics
NCT03614767
Time of Effect Onset in Treating Overactive Bladder or Non Obstructive Urinary Retention by Sacral Neuromodulation
NCT02040519
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Materials and methods: We evaluated all patients screened for eligibility to receive SNM treatment since the introduction of the tined lead technique in our centre in 2002. In May 2009, all implanted patients were asked to keep a voiding diary to record the effect of SNM on urinary symptoms. Success was defined as more than 50% improvement in at least one of the relevant voiding diary parameters compared to baseline. Chi square analysis was used to evaluate differences in long-term outcome for the separate screening methods.
Results: In total, 92 patients were screened for SNM. Of the 76 patients who were screened with PNE, 35 (46%) met the criteria for permanent implantation, whereas 11 of the 16 patients (69%) who underwent direct screening with TLP had permanent stimulators placed. Of the 41 patients who failed PNE and subsequently underwent screening with TLP, 18 (44%) were implanted with an INS after showing a successful response. The mean follow-up was 53 months (range 35-77 months) at the time of voiding diary analysis. Statistical analysis showed no difference between type of screening and long-term success (p=0.94).
Conclusion: Although first stage TLP is a more reliable screening tool than PNE, the long-term success rate does not seem to be dependent on the screening method. Furthermore, patients who initially failed PNE but responded to prolonged screening with TLP, appear to be at least as successful in the long-term as patients who directly responded to PNE or TLP.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Patients treated with sacral neuromodulation
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* patients who have been treated with sacral neuromodulation for pelvic pain
18 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Scientific Foundation Urology Maastricht
UNKNOWN
Maastricht University Medical Center
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Maastricht University Medical Centre
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Philip van Kerrebroeck, Prof
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Maastricht University Medical Center
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Maastricht University Medical Centre
Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
1234
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.