Search

Background: Oral medications, onabotulinumtoxinA injections, and transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) are recommended by the American Urological Association/Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction guidelines as non or minimally invasive treatments for patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) without treatment hierarchy., Objective: The objective was to compare and rank the effectiveness and safety of oral medications, three doses of onabotulinumtoxinA, and TTNS on improving urodynamic outcomes in patient-reported outcomes and safety outcomes in patients with NDO., Methods: The authors searched PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Medicine, and clinicaltrials.gov, from their inception to October 2022 and included randomized controlled studies on the drug, onabotulinumtoxinA, and TTNS for the treatment of patients with NDO. Outcomes included urodynamic parameters, voiding diary, quality of life changes, adverse event rate and postvoid residual., Results: A total of 26 articles and 2938 patients were included in the statistics. Regarding effectiveness, all interventions except TTNS and α-blockers were statistically different for the placebo group. The urodynamic outcome and patient-reported outcome suggested that onabotulinumtoxinA injection (urodynamic outcome: onabotulinumtoxinA 200 U, the mean surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA): 87.4; patient-reported outcome: onabotulinumtoxinA 100 U, mean SUCRA: 89.8) was the most effective treatment, and the safety outcome suggested that TTNS (SUCRA: 83.3) was the safest. Cluster analysis found that antimuscarinics and β3-adrenoceptor-agonists possessed good effectiveness and safety., Conclusion: OnabotulinumtoxinA injection is probably the most effective way to treat patients with NDO, with increasing effectiveness but decreasing safety as the dose rises. The effectiveness of α-blockers and TTNS was not statistically different from the placebo group. Antimuscarinics and β3-adrenoceptor-agonists have good effectiveness and safety., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Background: A randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical study was performed on the efficacy and tolerability of IncobotulinumtoxinA (Incobot/A) vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA (OnabotA) intradetrusor injections in patients with refractory neurogenic detrusor overactivity incontinence performing intermittent catheterization., Methods: Sixty-four patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) or multiple sclerosis were randomized to receive 30 intradetrusor injections of Incobot/A or OnabotA 200 U; 28 patients in incobotulinumtoxinA group and 29 in onabotulinumtoxinA group completed the study. Primary outcome measure was the non-inferior variation from baseline in daily urinary incontinence episodes (week 12), with a non-inferiority margin of one episode/day. Secondary outcomes measures were changes in Incontinence- Quality of Life questionnaire, Visual Analog Scale Score (bother of symptoms on Quality of Life), urodynamic parameters, occurrence of adverse effects and related costs (week 12)., Results: At week 12, mean value of difference in urinary incontinence episodes/day between the two groups was -0.2 (95% two-sided CI: -1; 0.7); the difference in incontinence episodes/day between the two groups was -0.4 with a higher limit of one-sided 95% CI of 0.2 episodes/day which was much lower than the non-inferiority margin of one episode/day. Total score and subscores of Incontinence- Quality of Life questionnaire, Visual Analog Scale scores and urodynamics did not show differences between the two groups. Adverse effects were similar for both treatments, with urinary tract infection being the most frequent, localised effect. Minor costs were observed following Incobot/A., Conclusions: In patients with refractory neurogenic incontinence due to SCI or multiple sclerosis, incobotulinumtoxinA was not inferior to onabotulinumtoxinA in improving clinical and urodynamic findings in the short-term follow-up, with comparable adverse effects but minor costs.

Background: Neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) is treated with antimuscarinics as first-line treatment. For patients with contraindications or unresponsive, intradetrusor injections with botulinum toxin (BoNT) are a safe and effective but expensive option., Study Question: Our study evaluated whether adding solifenacin to the intradetrusor injection of BoNT A could boost the effect of BoNT in patients with NDO due to multiple sclerosis or spinal cord injury refractory to antimuscarinics alone and/or lead to less frequent injections., Study Design: We performed a prospective study on 49 patients assigned alternatively to group A, undergoing BoNT injections, and group B, adding solifenacin., Measures and Outcomes: We gathered data from urodynamic testing and questionnaire assessments before and 3 months after injections and reinjections. We analyzed 39 patients who achieved total continence and a minimum 24-month follow-up period., Results: After treatment, both groups had statistically significant improvement of overactive bladder questionnaire (OABq) score, post void residue (PVR), and peak detrusor pressure (Pdet). Reinjection was needed after a mean 8.2 months for group A and 11.7 months for group B. We analyzed the improvement rate of parameters compared between the 2 groups-group B had greater OABq score improvement (A = 17.25 ± 5.07, B = 20.44 ± 4.51, P = 0.0485), as well as for maximum bladder capacity (A = 11.05 ± 7.04 mL, B = 19.39 ± 6.43 mL, P = 0.0005); differences in Pdet change (A = 51.72 ± 16.57 cmH 2 O, B = 50.80 ± 16.33 cmH 2 O, P = 0.7635) and PVR change (A = 17.67 ± 12.63 mL, B = 12.30 ± 8.32 mL, P = 0.126) were not statistically significant., Conclusions: Our study shows that adding solifenacin improves patient satisfaction, increases the interval between reinjections, thus lowering costs, and improves maximum bladder capacity. Pdet was kept in safe ranges, but no statistically significant conclusions could be drawn regarding Pdet and PVR decrease related to adding solifenacin. Although our study is limited by the small series of patients and lack of randomization and placebo control group, the BoNT-solifenacin combination could be considered in NDO in terms of cost-effectiveness. Further studies would be beneficial., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)