FES for Bladder: Direct or Indirect Means?

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Efforts to restore function to the neuroiogically disabled lower urinary trad by direct electrical stimulation of the bladder wall have met with only very limited success. This has been due to pain and cocontraction of bladder outlet mechanisms caused by presumed spread of the large currents required to effectively directly stimulate the detrasor muscle. Stimulation at the four anatomical sites of the sacral neural outflow on the other hand has been more successful. Conus medullaris stimulation has resulted in “good results” in just over half of the 28 patients so treated. Acceptance of this technique has been limited by the poor selectivity of the intramedullary electrodes in stimulating only the target motor neurons and the resultant clinical problems with the consequent stimulus current spread. Sacral anterior root stimulation has been used in at least 88 patients with generally good results. Cocontraction of the detrusor and external urethral sphincter are circumvented by the use of an intermittent pattern of stimulation. The primary disadvantage of this technique is the obligatory placement of the electrodes within the cerebrospinal fluid compartment. Clinical experience with stimulation of the extradural sacral mixed nerves is limited. Experimental studies indicate that success with this technique requires dorsal rhizotomy and pudendal neurotomy. Preliminary clinical experience suggests that these surgical manipulations may not be necessary for a successful outcome. The literature on clinical application of pelvic nerve stimulation is too limited for detailed comment on this technique. A definitive technique for restoration of bladder function by electrical stimulation remains to be developed.