Thomas M. Kessler

Understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying neuro-urological disorders is crucial for the development of targeted therapeutic interventions. Through the establishment of comprehensive biobanks, researchers can collect and store various biological specimens, including urine, blood, tissue, and DNA samples, to study these mechanisms. In the context of neuro-urology, biobanking facilitates the identification of genetic variations, epigenetic modifications, and gene expression patterns associated with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction. These conditions often present as symptoms of neurological diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, spinal cord injury, and many others. Biobanking of tissue specimens from such patients is essential to understand why these diseases cause the respective symptoms and what can be done to alleviate them. The utilization of high-throughput technologies, such as next-generation sequencing and gene expression profiling, enables researchers to explore the molecular landscape of these conditions in an unprecedented manner. The development of specific and reliable biomarkers resulting from these efforts may help in early detection, accurate diagnosis, and effective monitoring of neuro-urological conditions, leading to improved patient care and management. Furthermore, these biomarkers could potentially facilitate the monitoring of novel therapies currently under investigation in neuro-urological clinical trials. This comprehensive review explores the synergistic integration of neuro-urology and biobanking, with particular emphasis on the translation of biobanking approaches in molecular research in neuro-urology. We discuss the advantages of biobanking in neuro-urological studies, the types of specimens collected and their applications in translational research. Furthermore, we highlight the importance of standardization and quality assurance when collecting samples and discuss challenges that may compromise sample quality and impose limitations on their subsequent utilization. Finally, we give recommendations for sampling in multicenter studies, examine sustainability issues associated with biobanking, and provide future directions for this dynamic field.

Transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) is a promising treatment for neurogenic lower urinary tract symptoms. However, the evidence is limited due to a general lack of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and, also, inconsistency in the sham and blinding conditions. In the context of much-needed RCTs, we aimed to develop a suitable sham-control protocol for a clinical setting to maintain blinding but avoid meaningful stimulation of the tibial nerve. Three potential electrode positions (lateral malleolus/5th metatarsal/plantar calcaneus) and two electrode sizes (diameter: 2.5 cm/3.2 cm) were tested to determine which combination provided the optimal sham configuration for a TTNS approach, based on a visible motor response. Sixteen healthy volunteers underwent sensory and motor assessments for each sham configuration. Eight out of them came back for an extra TTNS visit. Sensory thresholds were present for all sham configurations, with linear regression models revealing a significant effect regarding electrode position (highest at plantar calcaneus) but not size. In addition, motor thresholds varied with the position—lowest for the 5th metatarsal. Only using this position and 3.2 cm electrodes attained a 100% response rate. Compared to TTNS, sensory and motor thresholds were generally higher for the sham configurations; meanwhile, perceived pain was only higher at the lateral malleolus. In conclusion, using the 5th metatarsal position and 3.2 cm electrodes proved to be the most suitable sham configuration. Implemented as a four-electrode setup with standardized procedures, this appears to be a suitable RCT protocol for maintaining blinding and controlling for nonspecific TTNS effects in a clinical setting.