Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Retrospective analysis shows significant symptom relief post-surgery in pediatric patients, indicating effective SNM treatment.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of sacral neuromodulation (SNM) under general anaesthesia in the treatment of neurogenic bladder (NB) in children, and to share clinical experience. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of the clinical data of 61 children with neurogenic bladder (NB) who successfully underwent sacral neuromodulation (SNM) treatment at Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from January 2021 to January 2025, with mid-term follow-up (up to 3 years). By tracking key indicators (such as symptomatology and urodynamic parameters) over an extended period, we assessed the safety and efficacy of SNM under general anesthesia for the treatment of pediatric NB and identified general patterns of postoperative recovery. Results Preoperatively, all 61 children exhibited symptoms of urinary frequency, urgency, and incontinence. After permanent SNM implantation, compared to baseline, symptoms of voiding dysfunction, including urinary frequency, incontinence, and urinary retention, were significantly alleviated. Urodynamic parameters, including detrusor pressure during the storage phase, bladder compliance, and maximum bladder capacity, also showed statistically significant improvements ( P < 0.05). Through mid-term follow-up, we modeled postoperative recovery curves using mathematical methods such as restricted cubic splines, and sensitivity analyses confirmed their reliability. Based on these models, subgroup analysis further revealed that the recovery of urinary retention symptoms exhibited different patterns across subgroups. Conclusion Sacral neuromodulation (SNM) under general anesthesia is a safe and reliable treatment for pediatric patients. Both early and mid-term postoperative care play a crucial role in optimizing recovery and ensuring sustained therapeutic efficacy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ding et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: