Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal 12/2007

01.12.2007 | Original Article

Implant infection after two-stage sacral nerve stimulator placement

verfasst von: Blair B. Washington, Brian J. Hines

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 12/2007

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

To report our experience with implant infection after two-stage sacral nerve stimulator placement. We reviewed the records of all patients who underwent implantation with a sacral nerve stimulator for the management of refractory cases of urge urinary incontinence, urinary frequency, and non-obstructive urinary retention. Baseline demographic data, interval to the development of infection, and the organism cultured are reported. After stage II neurostimulator placement, 5 out of 37 (13.5%) women required device removal for culture positive wound infections. Patients returned an average of 147.4 days after device implantation with evidence of infection. Infection occurred a minimum of 33 days, a median of 76 days, and a maximum of 461 days after sacral nerve stimulator implantation. The most common pathogen cultured was Staphylococcus aureus. After device removal, all patients resolved their infections. Two patients underwent uncomplicated reimplantation in the contralateral buttock 14 and 16 days after stimulator removal. The risk of infection after tined lead pretest and neurostimulator placement may be higher than previously observed in older techniques.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Jonas U, Fowler CJ, Chancellor MB et al (1998) Efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation for urinary retention: results 18 months after implantation. J Urol 165:15–19CrossRef Jonas U, Fowler CJ, Chancellor MB et al (1998) Efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation for urinary retention: results 18 months after implantation. J Urol 165:15–19CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Hijaz A, Vasavada S (2005) Complications and troubleshooting of the sacral neuromodulation therapy. Urol Clin North Am 32:65–69PubMedCrossRef Hijaz A, Vasavada S (2005) Complications and troubleshooting of the sacral neuromodulation therapy. Urol Clin North Am 32:65–69PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Abrams P, Blaivas JG, Fowler CJ et al (2003) The role of neuromodulation in the management of urinary urge incontinence. BJU Int 91:355–359PubMedCrossRef Abrams P, Blaivas JG, Fowler CJ et al (2003) The role of neuromodulation in the management of urinary urge incontinence. BJU Int 91:355–359PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Pannek J, Grigoleit U, Hinkel A (2005) Bacterial contamination of test stimulation leads during percutaneous nerve stimulation. Urology 65:1096–1098PubMedCrossRef Pannek J, Grigoleit U, Hinkel A (2005) Bacterial contamination of test stimulation leads during percutaneous nerve stimulation. Urology 65:1096–1098PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Lauwers S, de Smet F (1998) Surgical site infections. Acta Clin Belg 53:303–310PubMed Lauwers S, de Smet F (1998) Surgical site infections. Acta Clin Belg 53:303–310PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Implant infection after two-stage sacral nerve stimulator placement
verfasst von
Blair B. Washington
Brian J. Hines
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2007
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 12/2007
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-007-0386-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2007

International Urogynecology Journal 12/2007 Zur Ausgabe

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.