Are there clinical trials exploring brain-computer interfaces for urinary incontinence?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Clinical research is beginning to test brain-based approaches to improve bladder control, mainly using non‑invasive BCIs paired with rehabilitation or neuromodulation rather than implantable BCIs targeting incontinence directly (examples include motor‑imagery BCI during gait training that reported bladder benefits in people with spinal cord injury) [1]. Systematic reviews and trial roundups show growing activity in BCI trials broadly (around ~25 implant BCI trials by mid‑2025) but available sources do not identify a large portfolio of clinical trials specifically designed to use implantable BCIs for urinary incontinence; earlier reviews explicitly noted no clinical‑trial data on BCI treatments for neurogenic bladder as of 2023 [2] [3].
1. What the literature and trials actually show: incremental, not revolutionary
Recent peer‑reviewed reports document BCI interventions that produced secondary improvements in bladder function, typically in spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation contexts rather than trials devoted solely to urinary incontinence. A 2025 Scientific Reports paper described robotic gait training combined with a motor‑imagery, non‑invasive BCI and reported enhanced bladder outcomes in individuals with SCI, including reduced incontinence scores in some subjects [1]. A meta‑analysis of non‑invasive BCI studies in SCI found nine studies (109 patients) assessing motor and sensory outcomes and noted urinary incontinence as a common SCI complication discussed in context, but the focus of included trials was motor/sensory rehabilitation rather than bladder‑specific BCI therapy [4].
2. Implantable BCIs: many trials, few bladder‑specific studies
Industry and press summaries document a surge of implantable BCI trials from companies such as Neuralink, Synchron and others; by April–June 2025 commentators estimated roughly 25 implant BCI trials underway for motor, communication and control applications [3] [5]. However, systematic reviews and specialty literature emphasize a gap: a 2023 systematic review of invasive BCIs for motor restoration in SCI explicitly stated that “there are no clinical trial data reported in this patient population” for some autonomic outcomes including bladder control [2]. Therefore, while implantable BCI trials are growing, available sources do not identify implant BCI trials whose primary endpoint is treating urinary incontinence [3] [2].
3. Closed‑loop visions and hybrid approaches: where researchers aim next
Clinical and conceptual papers are proposing integration of cortical signals with peripheral neuromodulation (for example, closed‑loop control combining BCI decoding with sacral nerve stimulation) as a path to volitional bladder control in neurogenic patients [6]. That World Journal of Urology article presents a vision for combining sacral nerve stimulation (an established peripheral therapy for incontinence) with cortical BCI signals to create real‑time closed‑loop control, but it reads as a forward‑looking proposal rather than reporting completed bladder‑targeted clinical trials [6].
4. Non‑invasive brain stimulation and behavioral brain‑targeted therapies: early clinical work
Researchers outside the BCI implant field are also testing brain‑directed therapies. Reporting from 2025 describes the first controlled human work testing mindfulness plus non‑invasive brain stimulation for “latchkey” or situational urgency incontinence; that study is notable as an early, brain‑targeted therapeutic trial for incontinence even if it is not a BCI implant study [7]. This shows both clinical interest in central nervous system targets for bladder control and a diversity of approaches beyond implanted BCIs.
5. Where to look if you want to find or join a trial
General clinical trial registries and institutional trial pages list many BCI studies and many urinary incontinence studies separately. Johns Hopkins lists active BCI clinical trials on its website, and major centers (e.g., UCSF) list multiple urinary incontinence studies—yet neither source, in the snippets available, ties an active implantable BCI trial directly to urinary incontinence as a primary indication [8] [9]. ClinicalTrials.gov entries for specific BCI studies exist (e.g., NCT06429735 and older BCI records) but the search results supplied do not show a trial ID explicitly enrolling for urinary incontinence [10] [11].
6. What this means for patients and researchers
The field is at an exploratory stage where promising signals (BCI‑related rehabilitation improving bladder outcomes) coexist with a lack of dedicated implantable‑BCI trials for incontinence. Researchers are articulating feasible pathways—closed‑loop cortical decoding plus peripheral stimulation—but these remain largely conceptual or early‑stage, with bladder‑focused clinical trial data limited or absent in the sources provided [6] [2]. For patients seeking trials, the practical avenues now are non‑invasive brain‑based interventions, neurorehabilitation studies reporting bladder outcomes, or trials of established peripheral neuromodulation; implantable BCI trials for incontinence do not appear as an established category in the current reporting [1] [4] [3].
Limitations: available sources do not mention any dedicated, registered implantable‑BCI clinical trial whose primary outcome is urinary incontinence; my summary relies only on the provided materials and may miss very recent or niche registry entries not included here.