Stalder Stephanie A, van der Lely Stéphanie, Anderson Collene E, Birkhäuser Veronika, Curt Armin, Gross Oliver, Leitner Lorenz, Mehnert Ulrich, Schubert Martin, Tornic Jure, Kessler Thomas M, Liechti Martina D
Department of Neuro-Urology, Balgrist University Hospital, University of Zürich, 8008 Zürich, Switzerland.
Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zürich, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland.
Biomedicines. 2023 Jul 7;11(7):1931. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11071931.
Transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) is a promising treatment for neurogenic lower urinary tract symptoms. However, the evidence is limited due to a general lack of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and, also, inconsistency in the sham and blinding conditions. In the context of much-needed RCTs, we aimed to develop a suitable sham-control protocol for a clinical setting to maintain blinding but avoid meaningful stimulation of the tibial nerve. Three potential electrode positions (lateral malleolus/5th metatarsal/plantar calcaneus) and two electrode sizes (diameter: 2.5 cm/3.2 cm) were tested to determine which combination provided the optimal sham configuration for a TTNS approach, based on a visible motor response. Sixteen healthy volunteers underwent sensory and motor assessments for each sham configuration. Eight out of them came back for an extra TTNS visit. Sensory thresholds were present for all sham configurations, with linear regression models revealing a significant effect regarding electrode position (highest at plantar calcaneus) but not size. In addition, motor thresholds varied with the position-lowest for the 5th metatarsal. Only using this position and 3.2 cm electrodes attained a 100% response rate. Compared to TTNS, sensory and motor thresholds were generally higher for the sham configurations; meanwhile, perceived pain was only higher at the lateral malleolus. In conclusion, using the 5th metatarsal position and 3.2 cm electrodes proved to be the most suitable sham configuration. Implemented as a four-electrode setup with standardized procedures, this appears to be a suitable RCT protocol for maintaining blinding and controlling for nonspecific TTNS effects in a clinical setting.
经皮胫神经刺激(TTNS)是一种治疗神经源性下尿路症状的有前景的方法。然而,由于普遍缺乏随机对照试验(RCT),且假刺激和盲法条件不一致,证据有限。在急需开展RCT的背景下,我们旨在为临床环境开发一种合适的假对照方案,以保持盲法但避免对胫神经进行有意义的刺激。基于可见的运动反应,测试了三个潜在的电极位置(外踝/第五跖骨/跟骨足底)和两种电极尺寸(直径:2.5厘米/3.2厘米),以确定哪种组合为TTNS方法提供了最佳的假刺激配置。16名健康志愿者对每种假刺激配置进行了感觉和运动评估。其中8人回来进行了额外的TTNS检查。所有假刺激配置均存在感觉阈值,线性回归模型显示电极位置有显著影响(跟骨足底处最高),但电极尺寸无显著影响。此外,运动阈值随位置而变化,第五跖骨处最低。仅使用该位置和3.2厘米电极可获得100%的反应率。与TTNS相比,假刺激配置的感觉和运动阈值通常更高;同时,仅在外踝处感知疼痛更高。总之,使用第五跖骨位置和3.2厘米电极被证明是最合适的假刺激配置。作为一种采用标准化程序的四电极设置实施,这似乎是一种在临床环境中保持盲法并控制非特异性TTNS效应的合适的RCT方案。