Classical Predictors Do Not Predict Success with Sacral Nerve Stimulation for Chronic Pelvic Pain; A Retrospective Review in a Single Center

Muhammad Kashif, Andreas Goebel, Andreas Göebel, Vanja Srbljak, Rajiv Chawla, Mark Draper, Alison Cox, Manohar Sharma
Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2018 · vol. 20(5) , pp. 1059–1062 · doi:10.1093/pm/pny244 · PMID:30657984 · W2909026652
Other OA: closed CC0
Limited metadata. Only one source feed has indexed this record so far — no abstract, full text, or open-access copy is available through Endo Lab. The publisher's page (linked below) is the canonical location for the actual content. If you have institutional access, use "Find at my library".
View at publisher → View on OpenAlex View on PubMed
⚙ AI-generated summary by gemini-2.5-flash-lite, 2026-06-13 ⓘ

This retrospective review examined classical predictors for sacral nerve stimulation success in chronic pelvic pain patients at a single center.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Condition tags

chronic_pelvic_pain

MeSH descriptors

Electric Stimulation Therapy Pelvic Pain Adult Aged Chronic Pain Chronic Pain Electric Stimulation Therapy Female Humans Lumbosacral Plexus Male Middle Aged Pelvic Pain Retrospective Studies Treatment Outcome

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

References (5)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:23:40.374240+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-11-08T06:46:05.892536+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK