Sacral Neuromodulation: Determining Predictors of Success.

OBJECTIVE: To determine predictors of success for sacral neuromodulation in women with overactive bladder, urinary retention, and fecal incontinence. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on women who underwent a staged sacral neuromodulation implantation between 2007 and 2018. Clinical and procedural characteristics were recorded. Presence of intraoperative motor responses in either all 4 or <4 electrodes were used to group women. Endpoints included completion of stage II implant, tined lead revision, and patient-reported success. RESULTS: In 198 women with a mean age of 62.9 years (SD+/- 14.7), completion of stage II implant occurred in 92.4% of women, and 83.3% of these women reported success at the first postoperative visit. Continued success at 6 months was reported in 70.3%. Lead revision was noted in 23.0%. Age >65 years (odds ratio [OR] = 0.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.06-0.8) and prior onabotulinumtoxinA (onaBoNT-A) (OR = 0.2, 95% CI = 0.06-0.9) were negative predictors for completion of stage II implant on multivariable analysis. Also, prior pelvic floor physical therapy was a significant negative predictor of postoperative patient-reported success on multivariable analysis (OR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.1-0.6). There were no differences seen in women who had motor responses with either all 4 electrodes or <4 electrodes in any endpoint (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Patient age >65 and history of prior onaBoNT-A were associated with failure to complete stage II implant. Women with prior pelvic floor physical therapy were less likely to report success after sacral neuromodulation. Motor responses in <4 electrodes during lead testing did not impact patient-reported success.

Utility of recorded guided imagery and relaxing music in reducing patient pain and anxiety, and surgeon anxiety, during cutaneous surgical procedures: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Guided imagery and music can reportedly reduce pain and anxiety during surgery, but no comparative study has been performed for cutaneous surgery to our knowledge. OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether short-contact recorded guided imagery or relaxing music could reduce patient pain and anxiety, and surgeon anxiety, during cutaneous surgical procedures. METHODS: Subjects were adults undergoing excisional surgery for basal and squamous cell carcinoma. Randomization was to guided imagery (n = 50), relaxing music (n = 54), or control group (n = 51). Primary outcomes were pain and anxiety measured using visual analog scale and 6-item short-form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, respectively. Secondary outcomes were anxiety of surgeons measured by the 6-item short-form of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and physical stress of patients conveyed by vital signs, respectively. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in subjects' pain, anxiety, blood pressure, and pulse rate across groups. In the recorded guided imagery and the relaxing music group, surgeon anxiety was significantly lower than in the control group. LIMITATIONS: Patients could not be blinded. CONCLUSION: Short-contact recorded guided imagery and relaxing music appear not to reduce patient pain and anxiety during excisional procedures under local anesthetic. However, surgeon anxiety may be reduced when patients are listening to such recordings.

Pain in naïve and non-naïve subjects undergoing nonablative skin tightening dermatologic procedures: a nested randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain is expected during noninvasive skin tightening and can be anxiety provoking, especially for those who have not had prior treatments. OBJECTIVE: To compare pain reported by patients naïve to nonablative skin tightening energy devices with those who were not naive. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The non-naïve group at least three nonablative laser procedures or one nonablative skin tightening procedure, and the naïve group no previous treatments. Four sites at each of two anatomic locations (periorbital and midface or cheek) were treated in each subject with needle prick, pulsed dye laser, radiofrequency, and ultrasound with the order of the interventions randomized. All interventions except ultrasound were also applied to three abdominal sites. The difference in mean pain scores between naïve and nonnaïve subjects were averaged over the anatomic sites. RESULTS: Ten naïve and 10 non-naïve subjects completed study procedures. Mean pain scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.9. The mean for all naïve conditions was 2.3 ± 1.0, vs 2.2 ± 1.4 for non-naïve conditions. There was no overall difference according to group, device, or anatomic area. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in pain between naïve and non-naïve subjects undergoing cutaneous energy treatments. Individual devices may elicit more pain at specific anatomic locations.