+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract...

Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract...

Date post: 20-Sep-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 0 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
20
Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg University, Denmark Sparc, Feb 2015
Transcript
Page 1: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Lower Urinary Tract Technology response

Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD

Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab

Aalborg University, Denmark

Sparc, Feb 2015

Page 2: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Human vs animal Pig

Kaufman et al, BJUI, 2008

• Dorsal sacral root stim • Bladder irritated by

formaline • Conclusion: Bilat. SNM is

better and should be tried in patients unresponsive to unilat. Stim

• Inflammation, acute effect, too high stim ampl.

Page 3: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Human vs animal Cat

Tai et al, Am. J. Physiol, 2011

MS patients

Fjorback et al, Eur. Urol, 2007

Page 4: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Human vs animal

• Difficult to create animal model with relevant disease (OAB, frequency, urgency)

• Neuromodulation may affect extensive networks – not the same in animals

• Patients: longterm – Animal: acute • Results may be obtained with parameters

not possible in patients • Where possible do human experiments! • Animals for ‘simple’ experiments

Page 5: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Current devices perfect?

• Interstim for OAB & retention – 60-80% respond successful (> 50% improvement) – 10-20% are symptom free – Numbers are AFTER a test! – Better numbers for FI

• Urgent PC for OAB – Similar outcome

Page 6: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Dorsal gen nerve

Puden

Sacral

Cord

• On demand genital nerve stimulation • Supresses urgency & bladder

contraction • Could fully restore continence • May also prevent habituation

Page 7: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Closed loop event driven stimulation

Pressure increase

Detection Stimulation On

Inhibition

Pressure decrease

Stimulation Off

Page 8: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Test conditional stimulation

Page 9: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Human recordings

Page 10: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Results in 13 SCI patients

Hansen et al, J. Urol, 2005

Page 11: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

But ..

• Surface electrodes cause problems • Implanted electrode near genital nerve • Several short term studies (1-2 weeks) shown

feasibility

• Long term pressure recording not possible • Sacral root ENG • Artificial sensor • Patient controlled

Page 12: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Experimental setup

6 Patients

Skin

Rectum Bladder

S3

Spinal cord

Amp transmitter

Receiver Clitoral nerve

Kurstjens et al, J. Urol, 2005

Page 13: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Cutaneous

Page 14: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Bladder filling

Page 15: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

ENG from bladder

• Possible to record bladder related ENG in humans

• Signal amplitude and S/N is small • Technical improvements needed

– Smaller cuff on intradural dorsal root? • Extradural cuff: 2.8 – 3.6 mm diameter • Intradural cuff: 1.4 – 1.8 mm diameter

– Record from ganglion – Intrafasicular electrode – Multicontact cuff electrode

Page 16: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Le

insulating ~-~.,,...,,,.cuff

k=:::; nerve

1st-rank amplifiers

0

0

etc

tripole amplifier outputs (TAO)

>----t-1 (N-1) t

(0) 't

time 2nd-rank delaysamplifiers

. Isignal processing. unit for one velocity

~

~ bandpass filter

output for one matched velocity

Page 17: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Bladder sensor

Page 18: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Recording in acute pig

Page 19: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Patient controlled

• Most patients can ‘feel’ their bladder • Results show feasibility • ~15 patients (SCI, OAB wet) have used this at

home with good results • Fast intent detection is important

Page 20: Lower Urinary Tract Technology Response - NIH Common Fund · 2015. 4. 2. · Lower Urinary Tract Technology response Nico J.M. Rijkhoff, MSc, PhD Professor of Uro-Genital Rehab Aalborg

Summary

• Limited usefulness of animal work for therapy optimization

• On demand stimulation of the DGN may fully restore continence

• Most simple: patient controlled • Automatic control most likely preferred –

requires a sensor • Invasive, complexity, userinteraction


Recommended