Maternal and foetal physiological response of sacral surface electrical stimulation during pregnancy: A preliminary study

Abstract

New Findings What is the central question of this study?The physiological response to sacral neuromodulation by pregnant women and foetuses has not been previously explored. What is the main finding and its importance?Sacral surface electrical stimulation had no adverse effect on pregnant women and foetuses at least 36 weeks of gestation. It may cause uterine relaxation resulting from decreased uterine artery pulsatility index and increased umbilical venous flow volume and thereby improve utero‐placental perfusion and improve lower back pain. Abstract This study aimed to examine the impact of sacral surface electrical stimulation on maternal and foetal physiology during pregnancy. Ten pregnant women at 36 weeks of gestation without multiple gestations, foetuses with malformations, foetal growth restriction, hypertensive disorders, polyhydramnios, or oligohydramnios were enrolled. This prospective study monitored maternal and foetal physiological responses before and after sacral surface electrical stimulation for single pregnancies. Sacral surface electrical stimulation was performed once per patient. Each parameter was measured directly before and then immediately after stimulation. Follow‐up measurements were conducted at 12 h, 1 day, 2 days and 7 days after stimulation. Variables of interest were compared before and after the stimulation. Regarding the foetal Doppler measurements, significant differences were not found in the umbilical and middle cerebral artery pulsatility index. However, foetuses showed a significant increase in the umbilical venous flow volume. The uterine contraction frequency and the maternal uterine artery pulsatility index significantly decreased. Pregnancy outcomes, and rates of caesarean section, foetal distress, and neonatal asphyxia were not confirmed. In conclusion, sacral surface electrical stimulation had no adverse effects on pregnant women or foetuses at 36 weeks of gestation and might improve utero‐placental perfusion and lower back pain.

Review article: Functional dyspepsia and pregnancy—Effects and management in a special population

“…Gastric electrical stimulation is approved for gastroparesis 204 . While there were no available studies in the FD population, electrical stimulation has been safely used during pregnancy for a variety of purposes 205–209 . Concerns about teratogenicity or abortion were not shown, 210,211 although electrical stimulation has also been shown to be capable of purposefully inducing labor 212 .…”

“…204 While there were no available studies in the FD population, electrical stimulation has been safely used during pregnancy for a variety of purposes. [205][206][207][208][209] Concerns about teratogenicity or abortion were not shown, 210,211 although electrical stimulation has also been shown to be capable of purposefully inducing labor. 212 In breastfeeding women, post-partum uterine contraction pain was successfully managed using a variation of SNM with no reported adverse events in one RCT.…”