Introduction: The factors that impact external anal sphincter (EAS) recruitment in clinical pudendal neuromodulation are not well understood. Therefore, the goal of this study was to identify and quantify physiological, demographic, and stimulation factors that significantly affect EAS recruitment in participants receiving pudendal neuromodulation for treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms. Methods: Demographic and diagnostic information were collected from participants upon entry to the study. MRI and CT were used to capture patient pudendal nerve anatomy and register the location of the implanted lead. EAS activation by pudendal nerve stimulation at different amplitudes and pulse widths was recorded during neurostimulator lead implantation in the operating room. Linear mixed modeling was used to quantify the impact each variable had on EAS recruitment in the sixteen enrolled participants. Results: Participant sex, age, and BMI did not significantly affect EAS recruitment with pudendal nerve stimulation. Participant diagnoses had significant relationships to EAS recruitment, likely due to unbalanced group sizes. A pulse width of 210 μs required significantly less current than 60 μs (p = 0.005) to activate the EAS at threshold and significantly less charge than 450 μs (p = 0.02) to activate the EAS at threshold. Increased distance between the stimulating electrode and the pudendal nerve decreased the magnitude of the EAS response (p = 0.0011) and increased EAS activation threshold (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Of the three tested pulse widths, 210 μs requires the least charge and is a good choice for stimulation. The distance between the electrode and pudendal nerve plays an important role in EAS and pudendal nerve recruitment and minimizing this distance should be a priority during lead implantation.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

NCT04236596

This project was funded through the NIH SPARC program (award OT2OD028191).

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study design was approved by the University of Michigan Institutional Review Board (HUM00165005).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

The data set from the study will be found on the SPARC Science data portal at DOI: 10.26275.pc8r-r3iu after completing the SPARC curation process.

https://doi.org/10.26275/pc8r-r3iu