Long-term effect of MRI on sacral anterior root stimulator: the Stoke Mandeville experience

Sacral Anterior Root Stimulation and Visceral Function Outcomes in Spinal Cord Injury-A Systematic Review of the Literature Over Four Decades

OBJECTIVE

Sacral anterior root stimulation (SARS) was developed 40 years ago to restore urinary and bowel functions to individuals with spinal cord injury. Mostly used to restore lower urinary tract function, SARS implantation is coupled with sacral deafferentation to counteract the problems of chronic detrusor sphincter dyssynergia and detrusor overactivity. In this article, we systematically review 40 years of SARS implantation and assess the medical added value of this approach in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. We identified 4 axes of investigation: 1) impact on visceral functions, 2) implantation safety and device reliability, 3) individuals' quality of life, and 4) additional information about the procedure.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed. Three databases were consulted: PubMed, EBSCOhost, and Pascal. A total of 219 abstracts were screened and 38 articles were retained for analysis (1147 implantations).

RESULTS

The SARS technique showed good clinical results (85.9% of individuals used their implant for micturition and 67.9% to ease bowel movements) and improved individual quality of life. Conversely, several sources of complications were reported after implantation (e.g., surgical complications and failure).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite promising results, a decline in implantations was observed. This decline can be linked to the complication rate, as well as to the development of new therapeutics (e.g., botulinum toxin) and directions for research (spinal cord stimulation) that may have an impact on people. Nevertheless, the lack of alternatives in the short-term suggests that the SARS implant is still relevant for the restoration of visceral functions after spinal cord injury.

A Comprehensive Practice Guideline for Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compatibility in Implanted Neuromodulation Devices

OBJECTIVES

The evolution of neuromodulation devices in order to enter magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners has been one of understanding limitations, engineering modifications, and the development of a consensus within the community in which the FDA could safely administer labeling for the devices. In the initial decades of neuromodulation, it has been contraindicated for MRI use with implanted devices. In this review, we take a comprehensive approach to address all the major products currently on the market in order to provide physicians with the ability to determine when an MRI can be performed for each type of device implant.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We have prepared a narrative review of MRI guidelines for currently marketed implanted neuromodulation devices including spinal cord stimulators, intrathecal drug delivery systems, peripheral nerve stimulators, deep brain stimulators, vagal nerve stimulators, and sacral nerve stimulators. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE/OVID, SCOPUS, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles, as well as manufacturer-provided information.

RESULTS

Guidelines and recommendations for each device and their respective guidelines for use in and around MR environments are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first comprehensive guideline with regards to various devices in the market and MRI compatibility from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience.

Neuromodulation for Neurogenic Bladder

Although neuromodulation is well established for the treatment of non-neurogenic lower urinary tract symptoms, recent literature supports its use in the patient having LUTS associated with a neurologic condition. Sacral neuromodulation, in particular, may see new use as a modality to facilitate neurologic remodeling in spinal cord injured patients as well as children. As a therapeutic option, sacral neuromodulation and dorsal genital nerve stimulation may one day become more effective and more efficient utilizing the concept of closed-loop feedback, where electro-neurogram and bladder pressure data are incorporated into stimulation routines. In addition, some older therapies are reviewed that have recently demonstrated success in this patient population.