Lead Migration Following Sacral Neuromodulation Implantation: Contemporary Real-World Experience From a High-Volume Academic Center.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Zhenyue Huang, Spencer H Griffin, Sargam Panpaliya, Eshwin Varghese, Sara O'Sullivan-Bakshi, Kathryn Bass, Heng Ruan, Tiffany Lynn Damm, Tal Cohen, Justina Tam, Steve Weissbart, Jason Kim
{"title":"Lead Migration Following Sacral Neuromodulation Implantation: Contemporary Real-World Experience From a High-Volume Academic Center.","authors":"Zhenyue Huang, Spencer H Griffin, Sargam Panpaliya, Eshwin Varghese, Sara O'Sullivan-Bakshi, Kathryn Bass, Heng Ruan, Tiffany Lynn Damm, Tal Cohen, Justina Tam, Steve Weissbart, Jason Kim","doi":"10.1002/nau.70464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lead migration is a recognized cause of recurrent symptoms and revision following sacral neuromodulation (SNM), yet its radiographic characteristics and associated risk factors remain poorly defined. We evaluated postoperative sacral imaging obtained for suspected lead migration to characterize migration patterns and to identify factors independently associated with lead migration in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing SNM implantation.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective review of all patients undergoing SNM implantation at a tertiary academic referral center between September 2019 and June 2025. Lead migration was assessed by comparing baseline intraoperative fluoroscopic images with follow-up radiographs using a standardized radiographic measurement protocol.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 445 patients undergoing SNM implantation, 173 met at least one predefined indication for postoperative imaging. Ninety-two had both baseline and follow-up imaging available for quantitative assessment. Overall, 35/445 (7.86%) patients had confirmed lead migration. Migration occurred predominantly in the forward direction (62.9%), with a median time to migration of 16 months (interquartile range, 7-28 months). A total of 29/35 patients (82.9%) underwent surgical revision or device removal. On Firth bias-reduced multivariable logistic regression analysis, Axonics devices were associated with higher odds of lead migration compared with Medtronic devices (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-6.62; p = 0.031), after adjustment for implantation approach, rechargeable device status, BMI, and age-adjusted CCI. Massive migration (> 21 mm) occurred only in Axonics devices.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Lead migration following SNM implantation was uncommon but frequently resulted in surgical intervention. Axonics devices were associated with higher odds of lead migration after adjustment for selected clinical and device-related factors. Importantly given the relatively small number of migration events and retrospective study design, this finding should be considered hypothesis-generating rather than evidence of a causal association. Prospective multicenter studies are warranted to validate these findings and further define the mechanisms and clinical significance of SNM lead migration.</p>","PeriodicalId":19200,"journal":{"name":"Neurourology and Urodynamics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurourology and Urodynamics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.70464","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Lead migration is a recognized cause of recurrent symptoms and revision following sacral neuromodulation (SNM), yet its radiographic characteristics and associated risk factors remain poorly defined. We evaluated postoperative sacral imaging obtained for suspected lead migration to characterize migration patterns and to identify factors independently associated with lead migration in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing SNM implantation.

Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective review of all patients undergoing SNM implantation at a tertiary academic referral center between September 2019 and June 2025. Lead migration was assessed by comparing baseline intraoperative fluoroscopic images with follow-up radiographs using a standardized radiographic measurement protocol.

Results: Among 445 patients undergoing SNM implantation, 173 met at least one predefined indication for postoperative imaging. Ninety-two had both baseline and follow-up imaging available for quantitative assessment. Overall, 35/445 (7.86%) patients had confirmed lead migration. Migration occurred predominantly in the forward direction (62.9%), with a median time to migration of 16 months (interquartile range, 7-28 months). A total of 29/35 patients (82.9%) underwent surgical revision or device removal. On Firth bias-reduced multivariable logistic regression analysis, Axonics devices were associated with higher odds of lead migration compared with Medtronic devices (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-6.62; p = 0.031), after adjustment for implantation approach, rechargeable device status, BMI, and age-adjusted CCI. Massive migration (> 21 mm) occurred only in Axonics devices.

Conclusions: Lead migration following SNM implantation was uncommon but frequently resulted in surgical intervention. Axonics devices were associated with higher odds of lead migration after adjustment for selected clinical and device-related factors. Importantly given the relatively small number of migration events and retrospective study design, this finding should be considered hypothesis-generating rather than evidence of a causal association. Prospective multicenter studies are warranted to validate these findings and further define the mechanisms and clinical significance of SNM lead migration.

骶骨神经调节植入后的铅迁移:来自高容量学术中心的当代真实世界经验。
导言:铅迁移是公认的骶骨神经调节(SNM)后复发症状和修复的原因,但其影像学特征和相关危险因素仍不明确。我们评估了疑似铅迁移的术后骶骨成像,以表征迁移模式,并确定当代接受SNM植入的患者中与铅迁移相关的独立因素。材料和方法:我们对2019年9月至2025年6月在三级学术转诊中心接受SNM植入的所有患者进行了回顾性研究。采用标准化的放射测量方案,通过比较术中基线透视图像和随访x线片来评估铅迁移。结果:在445例接受SNM植入的患者中,173例患者至少符合一种预先确定的术后影像学指征。92例患者的基线和随访影像均可用于定量评估。总体而言,35/445(7.86%)患者证实铅迁移。迁移主要发生在前进方向(62.9%),迁移的中位时间为16个月(四分位数间距为7-28个月)。35例患者中有29例(82.9%)接受了手术翻修或器械移除。在减少Firth偏倚的多变量logistic回归分析中,在调整植入方式、可充电设备状态、BMI和年龄调整CCI后,Axonics设备与Medtronic设备相比,铅迁移的几率更高(校正优势比[aOR], 2.66; 95%可信区间[CI], 1.99 -6.62; p = 0.031)。大规模迁移(bbb21 mm)仅发生在Axonics设备中。结论:SNM植入后铅移不常见,但经常导致手术干预。在对选定的临床和器械相关因素进行调整后,Axonics器械与较高的导联迁移几率相关。重要的是,考虑到相对较少的迁移事件和回顾性研究设计,这一发现应被视为假设产生,而不是因果关系的证据。有必要进行前瞻性多中心研究来验证这些发现,并进一步确定SNM铅迁移的机制和临床意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurourology and Urodynamics
Neurourology and Urodynamics 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
231
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurourology and Urodynamics welcomes original scientific contributions from all parts of the world on topics related to urinary tract function, urinary and fecal continence and pelvic floor function.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书