• The Journal of urology · Nov 2018

    Observational Study

    Can Lumbosacral Magnetic Resonance Imaging be Performed Safely in Patients with a Sacral Neuromodulation Device? An In Vivo Prospective Study.

    • Juan M Guzman-Negron, Javier Pizarro-Berdichevsky, Bradley C Gill, and Howard B Goldman.
    • Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio; Urogynecology Unit, Sotero del Rio Hospital and Division Obstetricia y Ginecologia, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile (JP-B), Santiago, Chile. Electronic address: guzmanj3@ccf.org.
    • J. Urol. 2018 Nov 1; 200 (5): 1088-1092.

    PurposeWe sought to determine the safety of sacral neuromodulation in patients during lumbosacral 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.Materials And MethodsWe prospectively recruited patients with a sacral neuromodulation implant who required lumbosacral 1.5 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging. Before imaging the patients completed validated urinary symptom questionnaires and a survey regarding the usual sacral neuromodulation sensation. The implantable pulse generator was interrogated, and impedances, battery life and stimulus amplitude sensory thresholds were assessed before and after magnetic resonance imaging. Devices were switched off before the patient entered the scanner. Patients were monitored during the study and magnetic resonance imaging related adverse events questionnaires were completed after imaging. Validated questionnaires were repeated 1 month after magnetic resonance imaging to assess for changes in sacral neuromodulation therapeutic efficacy.ResultsA total of 11 patients were enrolled in the study. Lower back pain, which was noted by 6 of the 11 patients (55%), was the most common indication for imaging. Immediately after magnetic resonance imaging only 1 patient reported mild discomfort during imaging at the site of the implantable pulse generator. This discomfort was present only during the scan and not afterward. Two patients reported warmth at the implantable pulse generator site during the scan, which was also present only during scanning. Patients did not report any other adverse events. There were no major changes in impedance or battery life after magnetic resonance imaging. Stimulus amplitude sensory thresholds and stimulation localization were unchanged. Validated questionnaires 1 month after imaging did not show worsening scores compared to scores before imaging.ConclusionsNo significant adverse events occurred in patients implanted with a Medtronic InterStim™ II device who underwent a 1.5 Tesla lumbosacral magnetic resonance imaging scan. Therapeutic efficacy of sacral neuromodulation was unchanged 1 month after imaging.Copyright © 2018 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.