Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2005 Aug;174(2):782-6.
doi: 10.1097/01.ju.0000164728.25074.36.

Response of external urethral sphincter to high frequency biphasic electrical stimulation of pudendal nerve

Affiliations

Response of external urethral sphincter to high frequency biphasic electrical stimulation of pudendal nerve

Changfeng Tai et al. J Urol. 2005 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose: We optimized the axonal blocking effect of high frequency, biphasic stimulation on neurally evoked contractions of the external urethral sphincter (EUS) and further investigated the repeatability of the blocking effect during relatively long periods to evaluate any acute nerve damage.

Materials and methods: Two stainless steel electrodes were positioned 5 to 10 mm apart on the decentralized pudendal nerve in alpha-chloralose anesthetized cats. The distal electrode was first tested at different frequencies (1 to 10 kHz) to search for the effective blocking frequency. At a fixed frequency (4, 6, 8 or 10 kHz) different stimulation intensities were then tested to evaluate their blocking effect. Sine waveform or biphasic pulses of a fixed pulse width were also tested. Finally, the proximal electrode was stimulated at 40 Hz for more than 40 minutes and during the same period the distal electrode (6 to 10 kHz) was repeatedly activated for 1-minute intervals in an attempt to block the EUS contraction induced by the proximal electrode.

Results: High frequency, biphasic stimulation (6 to 10 kHz) with a pulse width dependent on frequency is optimal to block EUS contractions compared with sine waveform or biphasic pulses of a fixed pulse width. Acute nerve damage caused by blocking stimulation was not observed on neurally evoked urethral pressure.

Conclusions: Reversible block of EUS contractions by high frequency, biphasic stimulation of pudendal nerves is a potential method for suppressing detrusor-sphincter dyssynergia and improving voiding in spinal cord injured patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types