The novel Axonics® rechargeable sacral neuromodulation system: Procedural and technical impressions from an initial North American experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The rechargeable Axonics® r-SNM™ System is currently approved and available in Europe and Canada, with US FDA approval pending. This article provides a review of the system along with technique and technical considerations for its implantation based on my clinical experience with the new Axonics r-SNM System. METHODS: The description of the surgical technique and technological considerations for the Axonics r-SNM System is based my clinical experience of 11 cases performed at UHN Toronto Western Hospital. RESULTS: While the Axonics system is intended to provide similar therapy to the existing SNM system, the Axonics system has several new technological advances. Understanding these differences and optimizing surgical technique is anticipated to improve outcomes and patient experience. CONCLUSIONS: Overall the Axonics r-SNM System and implant procedure requires minimal learning curve for experienced SNM implanters and provides several enhanced features for physicians and patients. Further experience by others may elucidate other nuances important to the implantation of this novel SNM system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".