Neurophysiology of the pelvic floor in clinical practice: a systematic literature review.

Q2 Medicine
Fiorella Bianchi, Giovanna M Squintani, M Osio, A Morini, C Bana, G Ardolino, S Barbieri, L Bertolasi, R Caramelli, F Cogiamanian, A Currà, G de Scisciolo, C Foresti, V Frasca, E Frasson, M Inghilleri, L Maderna, L Motti, E Onesti, M C Romano, U Del Carro
{"title":"Neurophysiology of the pelvic floor in clinical practice: a systematic literature review.","authors":"Fiorella Bianchi,&nbsp;Giovanna M Squintani,&nbsp;M Osio,&nbsp;A Morini,&nbsp;C Bana,&nbsp;G Ardolino,&nbsp;S Barbieri,&nbsp;L Bertolasi,&nbsp;R Caramelli,&nbsp;F Cogiamanian,&nbsp;A Currà,&nbsp;G de Scisciolo,&nbsp;C Foresti,&nbsp;V Frasca,&nbsp;E Frasson,&nbsp;M Inghilleri,&nbsp;L Maderna,&nbsp;L Motti,&nbsp;E Onesti,&nbsp;M C Romano,&nbsp;U Del Carro","doi":"10.11138/fneur/2017.32.4.173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Neurophysiological testing of the pelvic floor is recognized as an essential tool to identify pathophysiological mechanisms of pelvic floor disorders, support clinical diagnosis, and aid in therapeutic decisions. Nevertheless, the diagnostic value of these tests in specific neurological diseases of the pelvic floor is not completely clarified. Seeking to fill this gap, the members of the Neurophysiology of the Pelvic Floor Study Group of the Italian Clinical Neurophysiology Society performed a systematic review of the literature to gather available evidence for and against the utility of neurophysiological tests. Our findings confirm the utility of some tests in specific clinical conditions [e.g. concentric needle electromyography, evaluation of sacral reflexes and of pudendal somatosensory evoked potentials (pSEPs) in cauda equina and conus medullaris lesions, and evaluation of pSEPs and perineal sympathetic skin response in spinal cord lesions], and support their use in clinical practice. Other tests, particularly those not currently supported by high-level evidence, when employed in individual patients, should be evaluated in the overall clinical context, or otherwise used for research purposes.</p>","PeriodicalId":12560,"journal":{"name":"Functional neurology","volume":"22 4","pages":"173-193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.11138/fneur/2017.32.4.173","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Functional neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11138/fneur/2017.32.4.173","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Neurophysiological testing of the pelvic floor is recognized as an essential tool to identify pathophysiological mechanisms of pelvic floor disorders, support clinical diagnosis, and aid in therapeutic decisions. Nevertheless, the diagnostic value of these tests in specific neurological diseases of the pelvic floor is not completely clarified. Seeking to fill this gap, the members of the Neurophysiology of the Pelvic Floor Study Group of the Italian Clinical Neurophysiology Society performed a systematic review of the literature to gather available evidence for and against the utility of neurophysiological tests. Our findings confirm the utility of some tests in specific clinical conditions [e.g. concentric needle electromyography, evaluation of sacral reflexes and of pudendal somatosensory evoked potentials (pSEPs) in cauda equina and conus medullaris lesions, and evaluation of pSEPs and perineal sympathetic skin response in spinal cord lesions], and support their use in clinical practice. Other tests, particularly those not currently supported by high-level evidence, when employed in individual patients, should be evaluated in the overall clinical context, or otherwise used for research purposes.

盆底神经生理学在临床实践中的应用:系统的文献综述。
盆底神经生理测试被认为是识别盆底疾病病理生理机制、支持临床诊断和辅助治疗决策的重要工具。然而,这些检查对盆底特定神经系统疾病的诊断价值尚不完全明确。为了填补这一空白,意大利临床神经生理学会盆底神经生理学研究组的成员对文献进行了系统的回顾,以收集支持和反对神经生理测试效用的现有证据。我们的研究结果证实了一些测试在特定临床条件下的效用[例如,心针肌电图,评估马尾和延髓圆锥病变的骶反射和阴部体感诱发电位(pSEPs),以及评估脊髓病变的pSEPs和会阴交感皮肤反应],并支持它们在临床实践中的应用。其他测试,特别是目前没有高水平证据支持的测试,在用于个别患者时,应在整体临床背景下进行评估,或以其他方式用于研究目的。
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
Functional neurology
Functional neurology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信