How can we better manage drug‐resistant OAB/DO? ICI‐RS 2018

Chermansky, Christopher; Schurch, Brigitte; Rahnama’i, Mohammad Sajjad; Averbeck, Márcio Augusto; Malde, Sachin; Mancini, Vito; Valentini, Françoise; Sahai, Amit

doi:10.1002/nau.24055

Cited by 11 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other treatments with similar central effects, such as percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation, 53 deserve evaluation for patients with COUB. Combination treatments could be a challenging and promising option in drug‐resistant and refractory patients according to individual pathophysiology 54 …”

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is coexistent overactive–underactive bladder (with or without detrusor overactivity and underactivity) a real clinical syndrome? ICI‐RS 2019

Mancini

Tarcan

Serati

et al. 2020

Neurourology and Urodynamics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) can be classified into symptom syndromes based on which symptoms are predominant. Overactive bladder (OAB) syndrome, a storage dysfunction, and underactive bladder (UAB) syndrome, a voiding dysfunction, are common syndromes, which urodynamic tests may show to be caused by detrusor overactivity (DO) and detrusor underactivity (DU), but can also be associated with other urethro‐vesical dysfunctions. Sometimes OAB and UAB can coexist in the same patient and, if so, need a specific approach beyond treatment of the single and apparently opposing syndromes. Methods During its 2019 meeting in Bristol, the International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society held a literature review and expert consensus discussion focused on the emerging awareness of the coexisting overactive–underactive bladder (COUB). Results The consensus considered whether COUB is the combination of OAB and UAB syndromes, or a real unique clinical syndrome in the same patient, possibly with a common etiology. Definitions, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment were discussed, and high‐priority research questions were identified. Conclusions COUB (with or without urodynamic evidence of DO and DU) may be considered a real clinical syndrome, because it differs from single OAB and UAB, and may not be the combination of both syndromes. Urodynamic tests may be necessary in unclear cases or in cases not responding to initial treatment of the most troublesome symptoms. It is pivotal to define the evolution of the syndrome and the characteristic population, and to recognize predictive or phenotyping factors to develop a specific approach and adequate outcome measures.

show abstract

Section: Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Combination treatments could be a challenging and promising option in drugresistant and refractory patients according to individual pathophysiology. 54…”

Section: Minimal Invasive Treatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is coexistent overactive–underactive bladder (with or without detrusor overactivity and underactivity) a real clinical syndrome? ICI‐RS 2019

Mancini

Tarcan

Serati

et al. 2020

Neurourology and Urodynamics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At present, there is no evidence that longer stimulation durations produce better results and the optimal intervention protocol or schedule for both types of neuromodulations has not been determined. [ 34 ] More studies are needed to investigate these topics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment for overactive bladder: A meta-analysis of tibial versus parasacral neuromodulation

Wang

Liu

2022

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of parasacral neuromodulation (PNS) versus tibial nerve stimulation (TNS) for patients with overactive bladder (OAB). Methods: Databases including PubMed, Embase, clinicalTrial.gov , and Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched from January 1, 1999 to September 9, 2022. The improvements in a 3-day voiding diary were set as the primary outcomes. Then, the scores of overactive bladder-validated 8-question awareness tool (OAB-V8), King’s health questionnaire (KHQ), and international consultation on incontinence questionnaire overactive bladder (ICIQ-OAB) were also evaluated. Results: Five articles (4 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 1 prospective study) including 255 OAB patients were enrolled. Two kinds of neuromodulations had similar performances in the micturition (mean difference [MD] = 0.26, 95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.51 to 1.04, P = .50), urgency episodes (MD = –0.16, 95% CI: –0.64 to 0.31, P = .50), incontinence episodes (MD = 0.09, 95% CI: –0.41 to 0.59, P = .72), as well as in the nocturia episodes (MD = 0.04, 95% CI: –0.45 to 0.52, P = .89). Furthermore, there was no difference regarding ICIQ-OAB scores ( P = .83), KHQ ( P = .91), and OAB-V8 scores ( P = .83). Importantly, included studies reported no adverse events in the 2 groups. Conclusion: TNS and PNS had similar effectiveness for the treatment of OAB, moreover, without any identified adverse events in both groups. However, well-designed RCTs are stilled needed to verify our results.

show abstract

“…Currently, there is no evidence of superior efficacy with longer duration of stimulation, and the optimum intervention program or schedule has not yet been established for TTNS. [ 32 ] Further long-term study should go on to shed some light on these topics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment for overactive bladder

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: We aim to compare the safety and effectiveness of transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) versus percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) in treating overactive bladder. Methods: A systematical search on PubMed, Embase, clinicalTrial.gov, and Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1999 to November 1, 2020 was performed. The primary outcomes were the changes in a 3-day voiding diary. Quality of life scores were also evaluated. Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) was applied to conduct all statistical analyses. Results: A total of 4 trials (2 randomized controlled trials, 1 retrospective study, and 1 before-after study) with 142 patients were eventually enrolled. Compared with PTNS, TTNS had a similar performance in the voiding frequency in 24 hours (mean difference [MD] = −0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −1.35 to 0.05, P = .07), the number of urgency episodes in 24 hours (MD = 0.13, 95% CI: −0.36 to 0.62, P = .60), the number of incontinence episodes in 24 hours (MD = 0.01, 95% CI: −0.13 to 0.14, P = .93), as well as in the nocturia frequency (MD = −0.14, 95% CI: −0.52 to 0.24, P = .47). Moreover, comparable results were observed regarding HRQL scores ( P = .23) and incontinence quality of life scores ( P = .10) in both groups. The total complication rate in the current study was 2.1% (3/142). No adverse events were identified in the TTNS group. Conclusion: Current data supported that TTNS is as effective as PTNS for the treatment of overactive bladder, moreover, with no reported adverse events. However, the evidence is low-grade and well-designed prospective studies with a large sample size are warranted to verify our findings.

show abstract

How can we better manage drug‐resistant OAB/DO? ICI‐RS 2018

Cited by 11 publications

References 57 publications

Is coexistent overactive–underactive bladder (with or without detrusor overactivity and underactivity) a real clinical syndrome? ICI‐RS 2019

Is coexistent overactive–underactive bladder (with or without detrusor overactivity and underactivity) a real clinical syndrome? ICI‐RS 2019

Treatment for overactive bladder: A meta-analysis of tibial versus parasacral neuromodulation

Treatment for overactive bladder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About