Differences in Reprogramming Needs Between Overactive Bladder and Non-Obstructive Urinary Retention Patients Undergoing Sacral Neuromodulation.

Kendall H1, De Cubber L1, Pasupathy A1, Smits M1, Vrijens D1

Research Type

Clinical

Abstract Category

Neurourology

Abstract 768
Open Discussion ePosters
Scientific Open Discussion Session 108
Friday 9th October 2026
12:40 - 12:45 (ePoster Station 4)
Exhibition Hall
Overactive Bladder Underactive Bladder New Devices
1. MUMC
Presenter
Links

Poster

Abstract

Hypothesis / aims of study
Overactive bladder (OAB) and non-obstructive urinary retention (NOUR) can be treated with sacral neuromodulation (SNM). Following device implantation, regular follow-up is required, and the device can be programmed to optimize symptom control through various adjustments. While the effectiveness of SNM in OAB and NOUR has been established, evidence regarding the need for, and difference in, reprogramming in these indications is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the number of programming visits between OAB and NOUR patients treated with SNM.
Study design, materials and methods
Retrospectively data from patients with OAB and NOUR treated with SNM between 2015 and 2022 were analyzed including sex, age, diagnosis, operation dates, follow-up visits and programming records. The primary outcome was the difference in number of programming visits. Comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U and Chi-square test of independence, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was conducted.
Results
A total of 144 patients were included, comprising 104 with OAB and 40 with NOUR. Mean follow-up was 6.41 years (SD 2.61) and did not differ between groups. OAB patients required significantly more reprogramming visits during the follow-up period than NOUR patients (mean 2.59 vs. 1.43 visits, p < 0.001). Kaplan–Meier analysis showed shorter reprogramming-free survival in the OAB group (median 13.0 vs. 23.0 months, p = 0.031). There was no difference between the two indications in the need for, or timing of, lead revision, system explantation, or IPG replacement.
Interpretation of results
The mean amount of reprogramming visits significantly differed between both groups (NOUR 1.43 vs. OAB 2.59). The need for reprogramming showed a significant association with urological indication and remained significant in the Kaplan-Meier analysis, indicating that patients in the OAB group required programming sooner during SNM treatment compared to the NOUR group. There was no difference between the two indications in the need for, or time to lead revision, system explantation, or IPG replacement. These results suggest that patients with OAB exhibit a less stable response to
Concluding message
Patients with OAB undergoing SNM require more frequent and earlier reprogramming than those with NOUR. Revision and explantation rates were similar. Prospective studies with standardized protocols are needed.
Figure 1 Kaplan-Meier curves of reprogramming-free survival in OAB and NOUR patients
Figure 2 The need for intervention expessed in counts and percentages
Disclosures
Funding None Clinical Trial No Subjects Human Ethics Committee Medical Ethical Review Committee azM/UM (METC 2025-0076, project 303552) Helsinki Yes Informed Consent No AI Not at all
10/10/2026 14:44:46