Nissenkorn Israel, Shalev Moshe, Radziszewski Piotr, Dobronski Piotr, Borkowski Andrzej, De Jong Peter R
Sackler School of Medicine Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
BJU Int. 2004 Jul;94(1):105-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2004.04856.x.
To assess the safety and efficacy of pelvic floor muscle electrostimulation (ES) in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or mixed UI (MUI, urge and interstitial cystitis), using a new portable electrostimulator (Miniaturo, Biocontrol Medical Inc., Yehud, Israel) which delivers different forms of stimulation for treating these two conditions.
For SUI the stimulator is activated on demand only by a sudden increase in intra-abdominal pressure; for frequency and urgency a milder, continuous ES is used. The intensity of ES can be adjusted according to the patient's sensation. Women were enrolled into the study after satisfying inclusion criteria and pad testing; 23 participated in two study groups, i.e. 16 with SUI and seven with MUI (severe frequency, urgency and urge, and mild SUI). The pelvic floor muscles were stimulated through an electrode inserted paraurethrally, positioned similarly in all patients. In patients with SUI and MUI a pressure sensor was also inserted into the rectum, to record intra-abdominal pressure. Stimulation was applied for 1-4 h in patients with SUI and for 6 h in those with MUI. The evaluation was based on urinary symptoms (frequency, urgency, leaking episodes), quality-of-life questionnaires and pad tests at baseline and during stimulation.
All patients in both groups improved significantly; of the 16 patients with SUI, nine were completely dry during ES, and the remaining seven had a reduced mean pad weight, from 23 to 6 g (74%). There was no significant reduction in pad weight after sham ES (17 g before vs 24.2 g after). In four patients with SUI who continued ES for 4 h the mean cumulative stimulation time (calculated from the stimulator memory) was 3 min (1.3% of 4 h). In the MUI group there were no leakage episodes during ES and significant reductions in voiding variables (Student's t-test) in all. The mean (Sd) voiding frequency, urinary urgency and leaking episodes decreased from 8.1 (4.2) to 1.9 (1.5), 6.4 (2.3) to 0.7 (1.3) and 2.1 (0.7) to 0.7 (0.5) (all P < 0.001), respectively.
The concept of this ES system for treating UI is promising; this study supports the efficacy of this form of ES but no conclusions about clinical efficacy are possible at this stage, and thus a trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of this implantable device is ongoing.
使用一种新型便携式电刺激器(Miniaturo,以色列耶胡德市生物控制医疗公司)评估盆底肌肉电刺激(ES)对压力性尿失禁(SUI)或混合性尿失禁(MUI,伴有尿急和间质性膀胱炎)女性的安全性和有效性,该电刺激器可提供不同形式的刺激来治疗这两种病症。
对于SUI,仅在腹内压突然升高时按需激活刺激器;对于尿频和尿急,则使用较温和的持续性ES。ES强度可根据患者的感觉进行调整。符合纳入标准并通过护垫试验的女性被纳入研究;23名女性参与了两个研究组,即16名SUI患者和7名MUI患者(重度尿频、尿急和急迫性尿失禁,以及轻度SUI)。通过经尿道旁插入的电极刺激盆底肌肉,所有患者的电极位置相同。对于SUI和MUI患者,还在直肠内插入压力传感器,以记录腹内压。SUI患者的刺激时间为1 - 4小时,MUI患者为6小时。评估基于基线和刺激期间的泌尿系统症状(尿频、尿急、漏尿次数)、生活质量问卷以及护垫试验。
两组所有患者均有显著改善;16名SUI患者中,9名在ES期间完全无漏尿,其余7名患者的平均护垫重量从23克降至6克(减少74%)。假刺激后护垫重量无显著降低(刺激前17克,刺激后24.2克)。4名持续接受ES治疗4小时的SUI患者,平均累积刺激时间(根据刺激器记忆计算)为3分钟(占4小时的1.3%)。在MUI组中,ES期间无漏尿情况,所有排尿变量均显著降低(采用学生t检验)。平均(标准差)排尿频率、尿急和漏尿次数分别从8.1(4.2)降至1.9(1.5)、6.4(2.3)降至0.7(1.3)以及2.1(0.7)降至0.7(0.5)(均P < 0.001)。
这种用于治疗尿失禁的ES系统的理念很有前景;本研究支持这种形式的ES的有效性,但现阶段无法得出关于临床疗效的结论,因此正在进行一项评估该可植入设备安全性和有效性的试验。