Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsCongenital gastrointestinal and neural anomaliesColorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of epineural or intramuscular nerve electrodes for stimulated graciloplasty

Konsten, J., Rongen, M. J., Ogunbiyi, O. A., Darakhshan, A., Baeten, C. G. M. I., Williams, N. S.·2001·Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
DOI 10.1007/bf02234333
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Two different techniques have been developed to stimulate the gracilis muscle when it is used in anal neosphincter reconstruction. These are direct neural stimulation and intramuscular electrode stimulation. The aim of this study was to compare these techniques. METHODS: Comparison was made of gracilis anal neosphincter reconstruction using neural stimulation (Royal London Hospital in the United Kingdom) with the intramuscular muscular method (University Hospital Maastricht in the Netherlands). The United Kingdom data were obtained from a retrospective database, whereas the Netherlands data were gathered prospectively. RESULTS: A successful outcome was achieved in 46 of 81 patients (57 percent) in London and 148 of 200 cases (74 percent) in the Maastricht study (chi-squared = 7.2; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the two techniques in voltage required for stimulation of the neosphincter muscle during a ten-year period. Reoperative surgery for electrode failure or dislocation was required in 21 (26 percent) patients in the London study, whereas only four (2.7 percent) of the Maastricht cases required such procedures (chi-squared = 37.8; P < 0.05). The high electrode plate failure rate in the London study was related to the source of manufacture. CONCLUSIONS: Both neural and intramuscular nerve techniques provide effective long-term stimulation of the gracilis anal neosphincter.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf02234333

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Rius J, Nessim A, Gilliland R,et al. Stimulated graciloplasty: main trunk stimulation failures. Changing to intramuscular stimulation: a feasible option. Tech Coloproctol 1998;2:109–11.

Cited by

See all 20

Related

Metadata

Authors
Konsten, J., Rongen, M. J., Ogunbiyi, O. A., Darakhshan, A., Baeten, C. G. M. I., & Williams, N. S.
Affiliations
  • Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
  • Royal London Hospital (GB)
ORCID
Konsten, J.
Venue
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2001-04
Volume
44
Issue
4
Pages
581-586
ISSN
0012-3706 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1007/bf02234333
OpenAlex
W1978791457
Cited by
20
References
18
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diseases of the Colon & Rectum (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Congenital gastrointestinal and neural anomalies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Keywords
anal sphincter repair, neurostimulation, gracilis muscle, electrode failure, electrode dislocation, reoperation, long-term outcomes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Anal Canal, Electric Stimulation, Electrodes, Implanted, Fecal Incontinence, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Muscles, Prospective Studies, Retrospective Studies, Muscle Fibers, Skeletal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.