Is Permanent Sacral nerve Stimulation Implantation Under Local Anaesthesia Feasible and Effective?

Conclusionsimplantation of permanent sns under la is a viable surgical option, associated with several advantages that apply to both patients and service provision. performing this surgical procedure under la avoids the perioperative risks involved with (general anaesthesia) ga and also offers the possibility of sns treatment for patients in whom ga is medically contraindicated, ultimately widening the breadth of the cohort suitable for sns treatment. other potential benefits include reduction in time and costs involved in carrying out the surgery.resultsfour patients suffered from underlying cardiovascular disease and la was deemed more appropriate to minimise perioperative risks. the decision to opt for la in the other five patients was indicated due to patient preference. the average volume of lignocaine 1% used was 25 millilitres and operative length of time was 36 minutes, with the lead inserted into the right s3 foramen in all patients. eight patients were discharged on the day of the procedure. long term follow up revealed that sns alleviated the symptoms in the majority of the patients, but the benefit gained fluctuated over time. surgical revision was required in three of these patients, these included replacement of a lead, resiting of the implantable pulse generator, and explantation of the sns device.backgroundsacral nerve stimulation (sns) is a minimally invasive surgical technique that plays an important role in the treatment of disorders of the bladder and bowel. permanent sns implantation under local anaesthesia (la) offers many advantages.objectivesto assess if implantation of permanent sacral nerve stimulation (sns) under local anaesthesia (la) is feasible and effective.patients and methodsusing a prospective database, nine patients who had permanent sns implantation under la in our unit were selected and analysed.