Does sex matter? A matched pairs analysis of neuromodulation outcomes in women and men

  • Laura N. Nguyen
  • Jamie Bartley
  • Kim A. Killinger
  • Priyanka Gupta
  • John Lavin
  • Ayad Khourdaji
  • Jason Gilleran
  • Natalie Gaines
  • Judith A. Boura
  • Kenneth M. Peters
Urology - Original Paper
  • 73 Downloads

Abstract

Aims

To evaluate whether baseline symptoms and outcomes are influenced by gender in a matched cohort undergoing neuromodulation.

Methods

Patients in our prospective neuromodulation database that had a tined lead placed were reviewed. Those that had implantable pulse generator (IPG) placed were matched on age and urologic diagnosis. History, voiding diaries, satisfaction, Interstitial Cystitis Symptom/Problem Index (ICSIPI), and overactive bladder symptom severity (OABq ss)/health-related quality of life (HRQOL) preimplant and over 3 years were evaluated using descriptive statistics, repeated measures, and matched pair GEE or mixed analyses.

Results

Of 590 patients in the database, more women than men received an IPG (450/488; 92.2 vs. 84/102; 82.4%; p = 0.0011). Eighty matched pairs (n = 160; 81% ≥ 50 years old; 56.25% had urgency/frequency with urge incontinence—UI) were identified and evaluated. On voiding diaries, volume/void was greater in women only at baseline (p = 0.040); both groups improved over time (p < 0.0001). Urinary frequency improved in both women and men (p = 0.0010; p = 0.0025). Over 3 years, UI episodes/day improved only in men (p = 0.017) and UI severity improved only in women (p < 0.0001). ICSIPI, OABq ss, and HRQOL scores improved similarly in both groups (p < 0.0001 for all measures in both groups), and although more women were satisfied at 3 months (p = 0.027), groups did not differ at other time points.

Conclusions

More women undergo neuromodulation and have initial success and subsequent IPG implantation. UI episodes improved only in men, and UI severity improved only in women. Both women and men experienced similar levels of symptom improvement on other measures.

Keywords

Sacral neuromodulation Gender Patient outcome assessment Overactive bladder 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Drs. Nguyen, Bartley, Gupta, Lavin, Khourdaji, Gilleran, and Gaines, Ms. Killinger and Ms. Boura declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose. Dr. Peters reports personal fees from Medtronic Inc., for whom he is a consultant and advisor; personal fees from StimGuard, for whom he is a consultant and in whom he has an investment interest; personal fees from Taris, Inc., for whom he is a consultant and advisor; and personal fees from Allergan, for whom he is a consultant and advisor.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Irwin DE, Milsom I, Hunskaar S et al (2006) Population based survey of urinary incontinence, overactive bladder, and other lower urinary tract symptoms in five countries: results of the EPIC study. Eur Urol 50:1306–1315CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Steward WF, Van Rooyen JB, Cundiff GW et al (2003) Prevalence and burden of overactive bladder in the United States. Worl J Urol 20:327–336Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Laudano MA, Seklehner S, Sandhu J, Reynolds WS, Garrett KA, Milsom JW, Lee RK (2015) Disparities in the use of sacral neuromodulation among medicare beneficiaries. J Urol 194:449–453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cameron AP, Anger JT, Madison R, Saigal CS, Clemens JQ (2011) National trends in the usage and success of sacral nerve test stimulation. J Urol 185:970–975CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Anger JT, Cameron AP, Madison R, Saigal C, Clemens JQ (2016) Outcomes of sacral neuromodulation in a privately insured population. Neuromodulation 19(7):780–784CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anger JT, Cameron AP, Madison R, Saigal C, Clemens JQ (2013) Predictors of implantable pulse generator placement after sacral neuromodulation: Who does better? Neuromodul Technol Neural Interface 17:381–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gormley EA, Lightner DJ, Faraday M, Vasavada SP, American Urological Association; Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine (2015) Diagnosis and treatment of overactive bladder (non-neurogenic) in adults: AUA/SUFU guideline amendment. J Urol 193(5):1572–1580 (Epub 2015 Jan 23)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Peters KM, Killinger KA, Boguslawski BM, Boura JA (2010) Chronic pudendal neuromodulation: expanding available treatment options for refractory urologic symptoms. Neurourol Urodyn 29:1267–1271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bartley J, Gilleran J, Peters K (2013) Neuromodulation for overactive bladder. Nat Rev Urol 10(9):513–521CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jiang YH, Kuo HC (2017) Reduction of urgency severity is the most important factor in the subjective therapeutic outcome of intravesical onabotulinumtoxinA injection for overactive bladder. Neurourol Urodyn 36(2):338–343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abrams P, Artibani W, Gajewski J, Hussain I (2006) Assessment of treatment outcomes in patients with overactive bladder: importance of objective and subjective measures. Urology 68(2):17–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Robb SS (1985) Urinary incontinence verifications in elderly men. Nurs Res 34:278–282CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stav K, Dwyer PL, Rosamilia A (2009) Women overestimate daytime urinary frequency: the importance of the bladder diary. J Urol 181:2176–2180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patra PB, Patra S (2012) Sex differences in the physiology and pharmacology of the lower urinary tract. Curr Urol 6:179–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wooten GF, Currie LJ, Bovbjerg VE, Lee JK, Patrie J (2004) Are men at greater risk for Parkinson’s disease than women? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 75(4):637–639CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jousilahti P, Vartiainen E, Tuomilehto J, Puska P (1999) Sex, age, cardiovascular risk factors, and coronary heart disease: a prospective follow-up study of 14,786 middle-aged men and women in Finland. Circulation 99(9):1165–1172CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sielatycki JA, Parker SL, Godil SS, McGirt MJ, Devin CJ (2015) Do patient demographics and patient-reported outcomes predict 12-month loss to follow-up after spine surgery? Spine 40(24):1934–1940CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Berheto TM, Haile DB, Mohammed S (2014) Predictors of loss to follow-up in patients living with HIV/AIDS after initiation of antiretroviral therapy. N Am J Med Sci. 6(9):453–459CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura N. Nguyen
    • 1
  • Jamie Bartley
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kim A. Killinger
    • 1
    • 2
  • Priyanka Gupta
    • 3
  • John Lavin
    • 1
  • Ayad Khourdaji
    • 1
  • Jason Gilleran
    • 1
    • 2
  • Natalie Gaines
    • 4
  • Judith A. Boura
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kenneth M. Peters
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of UrologyWilliam Beaumont HospitalRoyal OakUSA
  2. 2.Oakland University William Beaumont School of MedicineRochesterUSA
  3. 3.University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  4. 4.Urology San AntonioSan AntonioUSA

Personalised recommendations