A pilot feasibility study of treating overactive bladder patients with percutaneous saphenous nerve stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Effective long-term treatment of overactive bladder (OAB) remains a significant clinical challenge. We present our initial experience with a new bladder neuromodulation method that electrically targets the saphenous nerve (SAFN). METHODS: A total of 18 OAB patients (female, 55-84 years) were provided with percutaneous SAFN stimulation. The SAFN was targeted with a needle electrode inserted below the medial condyle of the tibia. Activation of the SAFN was confirmed by the patient's perception of paresthesia radiating down the leg. Electrical stimulation was applied for 30 min and subsequently repeated weekly for 3 months. The effects of stimulation were assessed by a 4-day bladder diary and quality-of-life questionaire (OAB-q). RESULTS: Percutaneous SAFN stimulation was confirmed in all 16 patients who completed the study, and no adverse events were reported. Positive response to SAFN stimulation was achieved in 87.5% (14 of 16) of patients, as determined by either a minimum 50% reduction in bladder symptoms or a minimum 10 point increase in the HRQL total score. CONCLUSIONS: Electrical activation of the SAFN was consistently achieved using anatomical landmarks and patient feedback. The procedure was well tolerated and, based on our small cohort of patients, appears efficacious, and safe. This pilot study provides early feasibility data that points to a promising new intervention for treating OAB.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".