Percutaneous Nerve Evaluation With Fluoroscopy Versus Without
InterStim Implantation Rates Following Percutaneous Nerve Evaluation With Fluoroscopy Versus Without
1 other identifier
interventional
75
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The investigators propose a randomized control trial comparing the rate of implantation of the InterStim device following Percutaneous Nerve Evaluation (PNE) performed with or without fluoroscopic guidance.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Apr 2016
Typical duration for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
February 4, 2016
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
February 9, 2016
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
April 1, 2016
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
April 1, 2019
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
April 1, 2019
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
June 9, 2020
CompletedJune 9, 2020
June 1, 2020
3 years
February 4, 2016
May 13, 2020
June 7, 2020
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Number of Participants With InterStim Implantation Following PNE With or Without Use of Fluoroscopy
Percentage of PNEs that have permanent neuromodulation device implanted by 3 months
3 months
Study Arms (2)
Fluoroscopy guided PNE
ACTIVE COMPARATORFluoroscopy will be utilized to assist with placement and/or confirm correct placement of lead wires.
PNE without fluoroscopic guidance
NO INTERVENTIONNo fluoroscopy will be used during or after the placement of the lead wires.
Interventions
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Women age \>18
- English speakers
- Patients with urinary urgency, frequency, or urge incontinence refractory to at least 1 other intervention who elect to undergo PNE
You may not qualify if:
- Patients in whom bilateral leads cannot be placed
- Pregnant women
- Prisoners
- Less than 18 years of age
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
University of Louisville Physicians
Louisville, Kentucky, 40205, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Dr. Sean Francis
- Organization
- University of Louisville
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Sean L Francis, MD
University of Louisville
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restriction Type
- OTHER
- Restrictive Agreement
- Yes
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Principal investigator
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
February 4, 2016
First Posted
February 9, 2016
Study Start
April 1, 2016
Primary Completion
April 1, 2019
Study Completion
April 1, 2019
Last Updated
June 9, 2020
Results First Posted
June 9, 2020
Record last verified: 2020-06
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will share
* Age * Race * BMI * Preoperative diagnosis * Previous treatments for urinary urgency, frequency, retention, and/or urinary or fecal incontinence * Percent improvement in symptoms as determined by pre and post PNE voiding diaries * Whether or not InterStim implanted within 3 months of PNE * Date of PNE