Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 5, 2025
Non-Invasive Electrical Brain Stimulation Montages for Modulation of Human Motor Function
Published on: February 4, 2016
The Influence of Electrode Configuration Changes on the Sensory and Motor Response During (Re)Programming in Sacral
Sam Tilborghs1, Sigrid Van de Borne1, Donald Vaganée1
1Department of Urology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium; Department of Urology, Antwerp Surgical Training, Anatomy and Research Centre (ASTARC), Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Anatomy, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Objectives:
This study aimed to assess the neurophysiological basis behind troubleshooting in sacral neuromodulation (SNM). Close follow-up of SNM patients with program parameter optimization has proven to be paramount by restoring clinical efficacy and avoiding surgical revision.
Materials And Methods:
A total of 34 successful SNM patients (28 overactive bladder wet, six nonobstructive urinary retention) with an implantable pulse generator were included. All possible bipolar and monopolar electrode settings were tested at sensory threshold (ST) to evaluate sensory (mapped on a perineal grid with 1 cm2 coordinates) and motor (peak-to-peak amplitude and latency of muscle action potential) responses of the pelvic floor. Pelvic floor muscle electromyography was recorded using a multiple array probe, placed intravaginally. Parametric tests were used for paired data: repeated-measures ANOVA or t-test. A nonparametric test was used for paired data: Friedman ANOVA or Wilcoxon signed rank (WSR) test; p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. If significant, ANOVA was followed by Dunn-Bonferroni post hoc analysis.
Results:
Monopolar configurations showed significantly lower STs-1.38 ± 0.73 V vs 1.76 ± 0.89 V (paired t-test: p < 0.0001)-and presented with significantly higher peak-to-peak amplitudes-115.67 ± 79.03 μV vs 90.77 ± 80.55 μV (WSR: p = 0.005)-than bipolar configurations. When polarity was swapped, configurations with the cathode distal to the anode showed significantly lower STs, 1.73 ± 0.91 V vs 1.85 ± 0.87 V (paired t-test: p = 0.003), and mean peak-to-peak amplitudes, 81.32 ± 72.82 μV vs 100.21 ± 90.22 μV (WSR: p = 0.0001). Cathodal changes resulted in more changes in sensory responses than anodal changes (χ2 test: p = 0.044). In cathodal changes only, peak-to-peak amplitudes were significantly higher when the distance between electrodes was maximally spread (WSR: p = 0.046).
Conclusions:
From a neurophysiological point of view, monopolar configurations stimulated more motor nerve fibers at lower STs, therefore providing more therapeutic efficiency. Swapping polarity or changing the position of the cathode led to different sensory and motor responses, serving as potential reprogramming options.
