International Continence Society best practice statement for use of sacral neuromodulation.

AIMS: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) is an accepted therapy for a variety of conditions. However, despite over 20 years of experience, it remains a specialized procedure with a number of subtleties. Here we present the recommendations issued from the International Continence Society (ICS) SNM Consensus Panel. METHODS: Under the auspices of the ICS, eight urologists, three colorectal surgeons and two urogynecologists, covering a wide breadth of geographic and specialty interest representation, met in January 2017 to discuss best practices for neuromodulation. Suggestions for statements were submitted in advance and specific topics were assigned to committee members, who prepared and presented supporting data to the group, at which time each topic was discussed in depth. Best practice statements were formulated based on available data. This document was then circulated to multiple external reviewers after which final edits were made and approved by the group. RESULTS: The present recommendations, based on the most relevant data available in the literature, as well as expert opinion, address a variety of specific and at times problematic issues associated with SNM. These include the use of SNM for a variety of underlying conditions, need for pre-procedural testing, use of staged versus single-stage procedures, screening for success during the trial phase, ideal anesthesia, device implantation, post-procedural management, trouble-shooting loss of device function, and future directions for research. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines undoubtedly constitute a reference document, which will help urologists, gynecologists, and colorectal surgeons optimize their use of SNM for refractory urinary urgency and frequency, UUI, NOR, and FI.

Removal of Sacral Nerve Stimulation Devices for Magnetic Resonance Imaging: What Happens Next?

INTRODUCTION: Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) devices (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) are not approved to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of sites other than the head. When MRIs are required, devices are often removed prior to imaging. We reviewed the prevalence of device removal for MRI at a large academic institution and the subsequent clinical course of these patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of all SNM explants from 2009-2015 was performed. Cases explanted for MRI were analyzed to collect demographics, clinical characteristics, and postremoval management. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: Ninety patients underwent SNM device removal, with 21 (23%) occurring for MRI. At explant, 20 patients (95%) were female and median age was 66 years. Suboptimal symptom control from SNM was noted in seven (33%) of these patients preoperatively. Of those explanted, six (29%) required MRI for neurologic and 10 (48%) for orthopedic concerns. The remaining MRI indications included abdominal masses (10%), genitourinary disease (5%), surveillance for prior malignancy (5%), and cardiac disease (5%). Only 16 (76%) patients explanted ultimately underwent MRI. MRI results impacted clinical management in 9/16 (56%) of the imaged patients. Only two (10%) of explanted patients underwent device replacement. CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving SNM therapy, device removal for MRI is most commonly due to orthopedic and neurologic pathologies. About half of the MRIs performed impacted non-GU clinical management. It is of paramount importance to confirm the necessity of MRI before removing a functional SNM device. Since SNM replacement was rare in this cohort, research is needed on the safety of various MRI types with SNM devices in vivo.