Clinical efficacy of tolterodine with or without a simplified pelvic floor exercise regimen

Oral anticholinergic drugs versus placebo or no treatment for managing overactive bladder syndrome in adults

BACKGROUND

Around 16% of adults have symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB; urgency with frequency and/or urge incontinence), with prevalence increasing with age. Anticholinergic drugs are commonly used to treat this condition. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of anticholinergic drugs compared with placebo or no treatment for treating overactive bladder syndrome in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 14 January 2020), and the reference lists of relevant articles. We updated this search on 3 May 2022, but these results have not yet been fully incorporated.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials in adults with overactive bladder syndrome that compared an anticholinergic drug alone with placebo treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data from the included studies, including an assessment of the risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence using the GRADE approach. We processed data as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 104 studies, 71 of which were new or updated for this version of the review. Although 12 studies did not report the number of participants, there were 47,106 people in the remainder of the included studies. The majority of the studies had insufficient information to allow judgement of risk of bias and we judged them to be unclear for all domains. Nine anticholinergic drugs were included in these studies: darifenacin; fesoterodine; imidafenacin; oxybutynin; propantheline; propiverine; solifenacin; tolterodine and trospium. No studies were found that compared anticholinergic drugs to no treatment. At the end of the treatment period, anticholinergics may slightly increase condition-specific quality of life (mean difference (MD) 4.41 lower, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.28 lower to 3.54 lower (scale range -100 to 0); 12 studies, 6804 participants; low-certainty evidence). Anticholinergics are probably better than placebo in terms of patient perception of cure or improvement (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.66; 9 studies, 8457 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and the mean number of urgency episodes per 24-hour period (MD 0.85 lower, 95% CI 1.03 lower to 0.67 lower; 23 studies, 16,875 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, anticholinergics may result in an increase in dry mouth adverse events (RR 3.50, 95% CI 3.26 to 3.75; 66 studies, 38,368 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may result in an increased risk of urinary retention (RR 3.52, 95% CI 2.04 to 6.08; 17 studies, 7862 participants; low-certainty evidence). Taking anticholinergics may be more likely to lead to participants withdrawing from the studies due to adverse events (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56; 61 studies, 36,943 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, taking anticholinergics probably reduces the mean number of micturitions per 24-hour period compared to placebo (MD 0.85 lower, 95% CI 0.98 lower to 0.73 lower; 30 studies, 19,395 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of anticholinergic drugs by people with overactive bladder syndrome results in important but modest improvements in symptoms compared with placebo treatment. In addition, recent studies suggest that this is generally associated with only modest improvement in quality of life. Adverse effects were higher with all anticholinergics compared with placebo. Withdrawals due to adverse effects were also higher for all anticholinergics except tolterodine. It is not known whether any benefits of anticholinergics are sustained during long-term treatment or after treatment stops.

Conservative interventions for treating urinary incontinence in women: an Overview of Cochrane systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Urinary incontinence (UI) is the involuntary loss of urine and can be caused by several different conditions. The common types of UI are stress (SUI), urgency (UUI) and mixed (MUI). A wide range of interventions can be delivered to reduce the symptoms of UI in women. Conservative interventions are generally recommended as the first line of treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise Cochrane Reviews that assessed the effects of conservative interventions for treating UI in women.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library to January 2021 (CDSR; 2021, Issue 1) and included any Cochrane Review that included studies with women aged 18 years or older with a clinical diagnosis of SUI, UUI or MUI, and investigating a conservative intervention aimed at improving or curing UI. We included reviews that compared a conservative intervention with 'control' (which included placebo, no treatment or usual care), another conservative intervention or another active, but non-conservative, intervention. A stakeholder group informed the selection and synthesis of evidence. Two overview authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data and judged review quality, resolving disagreements through discussion. Primary outcomes of interest were patient-reported cure or improvement and condition-specific quality of life. We judged the risk of bias in included reviews using the ROBIS tool. We judged the certainty of evidence within the reviews based on the GRADE approach. Evidence relating to SUI, UUI or all types of UI combined (AUI) were synthesised separately. The AUI group included evidence relating to participants with MUI, as well as from studies that combined women with different diagnoses (i.e. SUI, UUI and MUI) and studies in which the type of UI was unclear.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 relevant Cochrane Reviews. Seven focused on physical therapies; five on education, behavioural and lifestyle advice; one on mechanical devices; one on acupuncture and one on yoga. Fourteen focused on non-conservative interventions but had a comparison with a conservative intervention. No reviews synthesised evidence relating to psychological therapies. There were 112 unique trials (including 8975 women) that had primary outcome data included in at least one analysis. Stress urinary incontinence (14 reviews) Conservative intervention versus control: there was moderate or high certainty evidence that pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), PFMT plus biofeedback and cones were more beneficial than control for curing or improving UI. PFMT and intravaginal devices improved quality of life compared to control. One conservative intervention versus another conservative intervention: for cure and improvement of UI, there was moderate or high certainty evidence that: continence pessary plus PFMT was more beneficial than continence pessary alone; PFMT plus educational intervention was more beneficial than cones; more-intensive PFMT was more beneficial than less-intensive PFMT; and PFMT plus an adherence strategy was more beneficial than PFMT alone. There was no moderate or high certainty evidence for quality of life. Urgency urinary incontinence (five reviews) Conservative intervention versus control: there was moderate to high-certainty evidence demonstrating that PFMT plus feedback, PFMT plus biofeedback, electrical stimulation and bladder training were more beneficial than control for curing or improving UI. Women using electrical stimulation plus PFMT had higher quality of life than women in the control group. One conservative intervention versus another conservative intervention: for cure or improvement, there was moderate certainty evidence that electrical stimulation was more effective than laseropuncture. There was high or moderate certainty evidence that PFMT resulted in higher quality of life than electrical stimulation and electrical stimulation plus PFMT resulted in better cure or improvement and higher quality of life than PFMT alone. All types of urinary incontinence (13 reviews) Conservative intervention versus control: there was moderate to high certainty evidence of better cure or improvement with PFMT, electrical stimulation, weight loss and cones compared to control. There was moderate certainty evidence of improved quality of life with PFMT compared to control. One conservative intervention versus another conservative intervention: there was moderate or high certainty evidence of better cure or improvement for PFMT with bladder training than bladder training alone. Likewise, PFMT with more individual health professional supervision was more effective than less contact/supervision and more-intensive PFMT was more beneficial than less-intensive PFMT. There was moderate certainty evidence that PFMT plus bladder training resulted in higher quality of life than bladder training alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high certainty that PFMT is more beneficial than control for all types of UI for outcomes of cure or improvement and quality of life. We are moderately certain that, if PFMT is more intense, more frequent, with individual supervision, with/without combined with behavioural interventions with/without an adherence strategy, effectiveness is improved. We are highly certain that, for cure or improvement, cones are more beneficial than control (but not PFMT) for women with SUI, electrical stimulation is beneficial for women with UUI, and weight loss results in more cure and improvement than control for women with AUI. Most evidence within the included Cochrane Reviews is of low certainty. It is important that future new and updated Cochrane Reviews develop questions that are more clinically useful, avoid multiple overlapping reviews and consult women with UI to further identify outcomes of importance.

Design of programs to train pelvic floor muscles in men with urinary dysfunction: Systematic review

AIMS

Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is a first line conservative treatment for men with urinary dysfunction, but reports of its efficacy are variable. This study aimed to systematically review the content of PFMT programs used for urinary dysfunction in men.

METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane, PEDro) were searched for studies that used PFMT in the treatment of adult men with urinary dysfunction. Details of PFMT treatment sessions and home exercise protocols were extracted. Criteria specific to PFMT were developed, based on the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template, and applied to all studies to measure the comprehensiveness of the PFMT description in the manuscript.

RESULTS

Results from the 108 included studies indicate substantial heterogeneity in both the content of PFMT and the quality of reporting of the components of the exercise regimes. There was notable disparity in the muscles targeted by the interventions (and few focused on urethral control despite the use in management of urinary conditions) and the intensity of the programs (eg, 18-240 contractions per day). Most studies were missing key details of description of the PFMT programs (eg, the position in which the pelvic floor muscle [PFM] contraction was taught and how it was assessed, methods used to ensure exercise adherence).

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in content of PFMT programs is likely to contribute to variation in the reported efficacy for management of urinary dysfunction in men, and unclear description of the details of the evaluated programs makes it difficult to identify the effective/ineffective components. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017071038.

Efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training in women with overactive bladder syndrome: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) in reducing overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms in women.

METHODS

Searches were performed at MEDLINE, PubMed, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Scielo, and Central Cochrane Library PubMed until January 2017. Controlled trials were researched by two independent reviewers. Eligible studies were restricted to random and controlled clinical trials that investigated the effectiveness of PFMT in decreasing OAB symptoms. Qualitative methodology was evaluated using the PEDro scale. Data was analyzed and interpreted qualitatively.

RESULTS

The final search retrieved eight studies (n = 1161 women with urgency symptoms), which were published between 2002 and 2016. The methodological scores varied between 4 and 7 in the PEDro scale. PFMT, with the objective of controlling urgent micturition, demonstrated improvements in quality of life in women with OAB. Most data in this revision came from small- to moderate-sized trials, with different and inconsistent outcome measures, which could have impacted the end results.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature regarding the effectiveness of PFMT in OAB remains heterogeneous and inconclusive.

Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is a first-line conservative treatment for urinary incontinence in women. Other active treatments include: physical therapies (e.g. vaginal cones); behavioural therapies (e.g. bladder training); electrical or magnetic stimulation; mechanical devices (e.g. continence pessaries); drug therapies (e.g. anticholinergics (solifenacin, oxybutynin, etc.) and duloxetine); and surgical interventions including sling procedures and colposuspension. This systematic review evaluated the effects of adding PFMT to any other active treatment for urinary incontinence in women

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of pelvic floor muscle training combined with another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone in the management of women with urinary incontinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 5 May 2015), and CINAHL (January 1982 to 6 May 2015), and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials with two or more arms, of women with clinical or urodynamic evidence of stress urinary incontinence, urgency urinary incontinence or mixed urinary incontinence. One arm of the trial included PFMT added to another active treatment; the other arm included the same active treatment alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality and resolved any disagreement by discussion or consultation with a third party. We extracted and processed data in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Other potential sources of bias we incorporated into the 'Risk of bias' tables were ethical approval, conflict of interest and funding source.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria, comprising women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI), urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) or mixed urinary incontinence (MUI); they compared PFMT added to another active treatment (585 women) with the same active treatment alone (579 women). The pre-specified comparisons were reported by single trials, except bladder training, which was reported by two trials, and electrical stimulation, which was reported by three trials. However, only two of the three trials reporting electrical stimulation could be pooled, as one of the trials did not report any relevant data. We considered the included trials to be at unclear risk of bias for most of the domains, predominantly due to the lack of adequate information in a number of trials. This affected our rating of the quality of evidence. The majority of the trials did not report the primary outcomes specified in the review (cure or improvement, quality of life) or measured the outcomes in different ways. Effect estimates from small, single trials across a number of comparisons were indeterminate for key outcomes relating to symptoms, and we rated the quality of evidence, using the GRADE approach, as either low or very low. More women reported cure or improvement of incontinence in two trials comparing PFMT added to electrical stimulation to electrical stimulation alone, in women with SUI, but this was not statistically significant (9/26 (35%) versus 5/30 (17%); risk ratio (RR) 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 5.38). We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. There was moderate-quality evidence from a single trial investigating women with SUI, UUI or MUI that a higher proportion of women who received a combination of PFMT and heat and steam generating sheet reported a cure compared to those who received the sheet alone: 19/37 (51%) versus 8/37 (22%) with a RR of 2.38, 95% CI 1.19 to 4.73). More women reported cure or improvement of incontinence in another trial comparing PFMT added to vaginal cones to vaginal cones alone, but this was not statistically significant (14/15 (93%) versus 14/19 (75%); RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.71). We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. Only one trial evaluating PFMT when added to drug therapy provided information about adverse events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.60; very low-quality evidence).With regard to condition-specific quality of life, there were no statistically significant differences between women (with SUI, UUI or MUI) who received PFMT added to bladder training and those who received bladder training alone at three months after treatment, on either the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-Revised scale (mean difference (MD) -5.90, 95% CI -35.53 to 23.73) or on the Urogenital Distress Inventory scale (MD -18.90, 95% CI -37.92 to 0.12). A similar pattern of results was observed between women with SUI who received PFMT plus either a continence pessary or duloxetine and those who received the continence pessary or duloxetine alone. In all these comparisons, the quality of the evidence for the reported critical outcomes ranged from moderate to very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found insufficient evidence to state whether or not there were additional effects by adding PFMT to other active treatments when compared with the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence (SUI, UUI or MUI) in women. These results should be interpreted with caution as most of the comparisons were investigated in small, single trials. None of the trials in this review were large enough to provide reliable evidence. Also, none of the included trials reported data on adverse events associated with the PFMT regimen, thereby making it very difficult to evaluate the safety of PFMT.

Clinical Guideline for Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

The "Japanese Clinical Guideline for Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms," published in Japan in November 2013, contains two algorithms (a primary and a specialized treatment algorithm) that are novel worldwide as they cover female lower urinary tract symptoms other than urinary incontinence. For primary treatment, necessary types of evaluation include querying the patient regarding symptoms and medical history, examining physical findings, and performing urinalysis. The types of evaluations that should be performed for select cases include evaluation with symptom/quality of life (QOL) questionnaires, urination records, residual urine measurement, urine cytology, urine culture, serum creatinine measurement, and ultrasonography. If the main symptoms are voiding/post-voiding, specialized treatment should be considered because multiple conditions may be involved. When storage difficulties are the main symptoms, the patient should be assessed using the primary algorithm. When conditions such as overactive bladder or stress incontinence are diagnosed and treatment is administered, but sufficient improvement is not achieved, the specialized algorithm should be considered. In case of specialized treatment, physiological re-evaluation, urinary tract/pelvic imaging evaluation, and urodynamic testing are conducted for conditions such as refractory overactive bladder and stress incontinence. There are two causes of voiding/post-voiding symptoms: lower urinary tract obstruction and detrusor underactivity. Lower urinary tract obstruction caused by pelvic organ prolapse may be improved by surgery.

Pelvic floor muscle training added to another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence in women

BACKGROUND

Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is a first-line conservative treatment for urinary incontinence in women. Other active treatments include: physical therapies (e.g. vaginal cones); behavioural therapies (e.g. bladder training); electrical or magnetic stimulation; mechanical devices (e.g. continence pessaries); drug therapies (e.g. anticholinergics (solifenacin, oxybutynin, etc.) and duloxetine); and surgical interventions including sling procedures and colposuspension. This systematic review evaluated the effects of adding PFMT to any other active treatment for urinary incontinence in women

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of pelvic floor muscle training combined with another active treatment versus the same active treatment alone in the management of women with urinary incontinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 28 February 2013), EMBASE (January 1947 to 2013 Week 9), CINAHL (January 1982 to 5 March 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (searched 30 May 2013), WHO ICTRP (searched 3 June 2013) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials with two or more arms in women with clinical or urodynamic evidence of stress urinary incontinence, urgency urinary incontinence or mixed urinary incontinence. One arm of the trial included PFMT added to another active treatment; the other arm included the same active treatment alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and methodological quality and resolved any disagreement by discussion or consultation with a third party. We extracted and processed data in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Other potential sources of bias we incorporated into the 'Risk of bias' tables were ethical approval, conflict of interest and funding source.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials met the eligibility criteria for inclusion, comprising women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI), urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) or mixed urinary incontinence (MUI), and they compared PFMT added to another active treatment (494 women) with the same active treatment alone (490 women). The pre-specified comparisons were reported by single trials except electrical stimulation which was reported by two trials. However, the two trials reporting electrical stimulation could not be pooled as one of the trials did not report any relevant data. We considered the included trials to be at unclear risk of bias for most of the domains, predominantly due to the lack of adequate information in a number of trials. This affected our rating of the quality of evidence. The majority of the trials did not report the primary outcomes specified in the review (cure/improvement, quality of life) or measured the outcomes in different ways. Effect estimates from small, single trials across a number of comparisons were indeterminate for key outcomes relating to symptoms and we rated the quality of evidence, using the GRADE approach, as either low or very low. There was moderate-quality evidence from a single trial investigating women with SUI, UUI or MUI that a higher proportion of women who received a combination of PFMT and heat and steam generating sheet reported cure compared to those who received the sheet alone: 19/37 (51%) versus 8/37 (22%) with a risk ratio (RR) of 2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 4.73). More women reported cure or improvement of incontinence in another trial comparing PFMT added to vaginal cones to vaginal cones alone: 14/15 (93%) versus 14/19 (75%), but this was not statistically significant (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.71). We judged the quality of the evidence to be very low. Only one trial evaluating PFMT when added to drug therapy provided information about adverse events (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.60; very low-quality evidence).With regard to condition-specific quality of life, there were no statistically significant differences between women (with SUI, UUI or MUI) who received PFMT added to bladder training and those who received bladder training alone at three months after treatment either on the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-Revised scale (mean difference (MD) -5.90, 95% CI -35.53 to 23.73) or on the Urogenital Distress Inventory scale (MD -18.90, 95% CI -37.92 to 0.12). A similar pattern of results was observed between women with SUI who received PFMT plus either a continence pessary or duloxetine and those who received the continence pessary or duloxetine alone. In all these comparisons, the quality of the evidence for the reported critical outcomes ranged from moderate to very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found insufficient evidence to state whether or not there were additional effects of adding PFMT to other active treatment when compared with the same active treatment alone for urinary incontinence (SUI, UUI or MUI) in women. These results should be interpreted with caution as most of the comparisons were investigated in small, single trials. None of the trials in this review were large enough to provide reliable evidence. Also, none of the included trials reported data on adverse events associated with the PFMT regimen, thereby making it very difficult to evaluate the safety of PFMT.

Anticholinergic drugs versus non-drug active therapies for non-neurogenic overactive bladder syndrome in adults

BACKGROUND

Overactive bladder syndrome is defined as urgency with or without urgency incontinence, usually with frequency and nocturia. Pharmacotherapy with anticholinergic drugs is often the first line medical therapy, either alone or as an adjunct to various non-pharmacological therapies after conservative options such as reducing intake of caffeine drinks have been tried. Non-pharmacologic therapies consist of bladder training, pelvic floor muscle training with or without biofeedback, behavioural modification, electrical stimulation and surgical interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of anticholinergic drugs with various non-pharmacologic therapies for non-neurogenic overactive bladder syndrome in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 4 September 2012), which includes searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and MEDLINE, and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials of treatment with anticholinergic drugs for overactive bladder syndrome or urgency urinary incontinence in adults in which at least one management arm involved a non-drug therapy. Trials amongst patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors evaluated the trials for appropriateness for inclusion and risk of bias. Two authors were involved in the data extraction. Data extraction was based on predetermined criteria. Data analysis was based on standard statistical approaches used in Cochrane reviews.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty three trials were included with a total of 3685 participants, one was a cross-over trial and the other 22 were parallel group trials. The duration of follow up varied from two to 52 weeks. The trials were generally small and of poor methodological quality. During treatment, symptomatic improvement was more common amongst those participants on anticholinergic drugs compared with bladder training in seven small trials (73/174, 42% versus 98/172, 57% not improved: risk ratio 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.91). Augmentation of bladder training with anticholinergics was also associated with more improvements than bladder training alone in three small trials (23/85, 27% versus 37/79, 47% not improved: risk ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.38 to 0.88). However, it was less clear whether an anticholinergic combined with bladder training was better than the anticholinergic alone, in three trials (for example 74/296, 25% versus 95/306, 31% not improved: risk ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.62 to 1.04). The other information on whether combining behavioural modification strategies with an anticholinergic was better than the anticholinergic alone was scanty and inconclusive. Similarly, it was unclear whether these complex strategies alone were better than anticholinergics alone.In this review, seven small trials comparing an anticholinergic to various types of electrical stimulation modalities such as Intravaginal Electrical Stimulation (IES), transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), the Stoller Afferent Nerve Stimulation System (SANS) neuromodulation and percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) were identified. Subjective improvement rates tended to favour the electrical stimulation group in three small trials (54% not improved with the anticholinergic versus 28/86, 33% with electrical stimulation: risk ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 2.34). However, this was statistically significant only for one type of stimulation, percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation (risk ratio 2.21, 95% confidence interval 1.13 to 4.33), and was not supported by significant differences in improvement, urinary frequency, urgency, nocturia, incontinence episodes or quality of life.The most commonly reported adverse effect among anticholinergics was dry mouth, although this did not necessarily result in withdrawal from treatment. For all comparisons there were too few data to compare symptoms or side effects after treatment had ended. However, it is unlikely that the effects of anticholinergics persist after stopping treatment. 

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of anticholinergic drugs in the management of overactive bladder syndrome is well established when compared to placebo treatment. During initial treatment of overactive bladder syndrome there was more symptomatic improvement when (a) anticholinergics were compared with bladder training alone, and (b) anticholinergics combined with bladder training were compared with bladder training alone. Limited evidence from small trials might suggest electrical stimulation is a better option in patients who are refractory to anticholinergic therapy, but more evidence comparing individual types of electrostimulation to the most effective types of anticholinergics is required to establish this. These results should be viewed with caution in view of the different classes and varying doses of individual anticholinergics used in this review. Anticholinergics had well recognised side effects, such as dry mouth.

Urinary incontinence: pharmacotherapy options

The impact of incontinence is felt by millions of people worldwide, with tremendous decrement in quality of life and enormous cost reaching billions of dollars. Urinary incontinence is defined as 'involuntary leakage of urine' and is categorized into two main types: urgency urinary incontinence (UUI) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). Behavioral modifications and pharmacologic therapies, primarily antimuscarinic agents, are the mainstay of treatment for UUI. These drugs are moderately efficacious but have troublesome side-effects, the combination resulting in poor compliance and persistence with therapy. There are several agents on the market today, each with some variation in pharmacologic properties. Whether these translate into meaningful differences in clinical efficacy and tolerability remains a matter of debate. Treatment of SUI has seen little success with pharmacologic therapy. In Europe, duloxetine is approved for treatment of SUI with marginal success rates; this drug, although available in the United States for treatment of depression, is not approved for SUI. The search for newer and better pharmacologic options and novel therapies is on-going, fueled primarily by the high prevalence of bothersome incontinence and the tremendous number of health care dollars spent on current therapy. This review addresses pharmacologic options for treatment of urinary incontinence.

Rehabilitation versus drug therapy for urge urinary incontinence: long-term outcomes

The objective of this study was to compare the residual effect of a 3-month rehabilitation treatment and a standard drug treatment for urge urinary incontinence (UUI) 21 months post intervention. Forty-four women (ages 27-68 years) who were diagnosed with overactive bladder (OAB) were divided into 2 treatment groups over 3 months: 24 women received rehabilitation (REH) and 20 women were treated with medication (MED) (oxybutynin ER). Outcomes measures included frequency of urination, quality of life (QoL), and number of side effects (no/SE), which were measured upon entry into the study (entry), completion of the intervention (3 months), and at follow-up 3 and 21 months after completion of treatment. In the follow-up period, there was a significant group-time interaction effect on freq/day and freq/night (p < 0.01). At the end of follow-up, the mean number of no/SE was significantly greater in the MED group compared to the REH group (3.3 +/- 0.5 vs 2.4 +/- 0.4; p < 0.05). A significant negative association was found between the urinary symptoms and the I-QoL at the 21-month follow-up (r (p) = -0.45 to-0.57, p < 0.05). In the long-term, the REH patients maintained and even improved the achievements of the intervention period while the MED patients deteriorated to baseline values in urinary frequency. The suggestion for future work is to investigate the effect of each REH treatment component on UUI symptoms.

How to make your article more acceptable for the statistical reviewer

Many medical articles have problems with methodological aspects. To help prevent this, medical statisticians should be more involved in all aspects of medical research. Having more statistical reviewing of manuscripts submitted to journals should also help, but will not cure the problem. This paper makes some suggestions that may help authors make manuscripts more acceptable methodologically, but there is no substitute for statistical involvement throughout the research process. Neurourol. Urodynam. 26:318-322, 2007. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled evaluation of the effect of functional continuous magnetic stimulation in patients with urgency incontinence

AIMS

To evaluate the effect of functional continuous magnetic stimulation (FCMS) on urgency incontinence in randomized, sham-controlled manner.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients with urgency incontinence, 16 males and 23 females (aged 66.0 +/- 16.5 years), who were refractory to pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), were randomly assigned either to the treatment schedule performing 10-week active treatment, followed by 4-week non-treatment interval and then by 10-week sham treatment (A-S, n = 20) or to that performing the sham treatment first followed by 10-week active treatment (S-A, n = 19).

RESULTS

At 10 weeks, the number of leaks/week, the total score of the International Consultation on Incontinence-Questionnaire: Short Form (ICIQ-SF), and maximum cystometric capacity (MCC) were significantly improved as compared with the initial levels (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.003, respectively) in the former group, but not in the latter group. Four (20.0%) patients were cured in the A-S group, while no patient was cured in the S-A group. At the end of the A-S schedule (24 weeks of study), the effect of the active treatment was still maintained at a significantly improved level, as compared with the initial level. At the end of the S-A schedule, the number of leaks/week was significantly improved as compared with the initial level and with its 10-week level (P < 0.001 and P = 0.049, respectively), as well as ICIQ-SF total score (P = 0.001 and P = 0.006, respectively). MCC significantly increased from its initial level (P = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Magnetic stimulation was effective on urgency incontinence in comparison to sham stimulation in this small patient group.

Effects of bladder training and/or tolterodine in female patients with overactive bladder syndrome: a prospective, randomized study

We compared the effects of bladder training and/or tolterodine as first line treatment in female patients with overactive bladder (OAB). One hundred and thirty-nine female patients with OAB were randomized to treatment with bladder training (BT), tolterodine (To, 2 mg twice daily) or both (Co) for 12 weeks. Treatment efficacy was measured by micturition diary, urgency scores and patients' subjective assessment of their bladder condition. Mean frequency and nocturia significantly decreased in all treatment groups, declining 25.9% and 56.1%, respectively, in the BT group; 30.2% and 65.4%, respectively, in the To group; and 33.5% and 66.3%, respectively in the Co group (p<0.05 for each). The decrease in frequency was significantly greater in the Co group than in the BT group (p<0.05). Mean urgency score decreased by 44.8%, 62.2% and 60.2% in the BT, To, and Co groups, respectively, and the improvement was significantly greater in the To and Co groups than in the BT group (p<0.05 for each). Although BT, To and their combination were all effective in controlling OAB symptoms, combination therapy was more effective than either method alone. Tolterodine alone may be instituted as a first-line therapy, but may be more effective when combined with bladder training.

Anticholinergic drugs versus non-drug active therapies for overactive bladder syndrome in adults

BACKGROUND

Overactive Bladder Syndrome (OAB) is defined as urgency, with or without urgency incontinence, usually with frequency and nocturia. Pharmacotherapy with anticholinergic drugs is often the first line medical therapy, either alone or as an adjunct to various non-pharmacological therapies. The commonest non-pharmacologic therapies are: bladder training, pelvic floor muscle training with or without biofeedback and electric stimulation to affect detrusor muscle activity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of various anticholinergic drugs with various non-pharmacologic therapies for idiopathic overactive bladder syndrome in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register (searched 29 November 2005), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2004), PREMEDLINE, Dissertation Abstracts and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised, or quasi-randomised, controlled trials of treatment with anticholinergic drugs for overactive bladder syndrome or urge urinary incontinence in adults, in which at least one management arm involved a non-drug new therapy. Trials amongst patients with neuropathic bladder dysfunction were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors evaluated the trials for appropriateness for inclusion and methodological quality. Three authors were involved in the data extraction. Data extracted was based on predetermined criteria. Data analysis was based on standard statistical approaches used in Cochrane reviews.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials with 1770 participants were included; all were designed as parallel groups except for one cross-over trial. Trial groups were well matched for baseline characteristics in all trials. Treatment duration was 3 to 12 weeks, with one trial carrying out a follow-up analysis at 24 weeks after starting treatment. During treatment, symptomatic improvement was more common amongst those on anticholinergic drugs compared with bladder training (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.90). Combination of anticholinergics with bladder training was also associated with more improvement than bladder training alone but with wide confidence intervals (RR 0.55; 95% 0.32 to 0.93). Similarly, the limited data favoured a combination of anticholinergics with bladder training compared with anticholinergics during treatment but the difference was not statistically significant (RR for improvement 0.81; 95% CI 0.61 to 1.06). For all comparisons, there were too few data to compare symptoms after treatment had ended. Adverse effects, such as dry mouth, were reported by around a third of those taking anticholinergics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of anticholinergic drugs in the management of OAB is well established. During initial treatment there was more symptomatic improvement when (a) anticholinergics were compared with bladder training alone, and (b) anticholinergics combined with bladder training were compared with each modality alone. Anticholinergics have well recognised side effects, such as dry mouth. There were too few data to assess whether or not effects are sustained after stopping treatment.

Efficacy of tolterodine in preventing urge incontinence immediately after prostatectomy

PURPOSE

Urgency and urge incontinence are frequently observed after prostatectomy. Although symptoms ameliorate within a relatively short time, they usually cause significant stress and anxiety to the patient as far as their duration is concerned. Aim of our study was to determine the efficacy of tolterodine in preventing urgency and urge incontinence after catheter removal in patients that underwent prostatectomy for benign prostate hyperplasia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven patients with moderate/severe lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement, scheduled for prostatectomy, were randomised into two groups, Group A (14 pts) received tolterodine 2 mg b.i.d starting the day of surgery, while group B patients received no such treatment. Tolterodine treatment was discontinued 15 days after catheter removal. All patients completed the International Prostatic Symptom Score (IPSS) and the International Continence Society (ICS-BPH) forms the day before surgery, and three times more, one, fifteen and thirty days after catheter removal.

RESULTS

Pre-operative total 1PSS and frequency of urgency/urge incontinence as determined by questions 3 and 4 of the ICS-BPH questionnaire were equally distributed between groups. Tolterodine was well tolerated and no adverse effects were reported. Post-operative IPSS and QoL scores did not differ between groups. However, the frequency of urge incontinence both the first day and fifteen days after catheter removal was significantly lower in the tolterodine group (16.6% vs. 69.2%, p=0.004 and 8.3% vs. 38.4%, p=0.039, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Tolterodine was well tolerated in all patients and had a beneficial effect regarding the postoperative urge incontinence. Trials of a larger scale could determine which patients would benefit more, especially according to the presence of storage lower urinary tract symptoms prior to surgery.

Role of muscarinic receptor antagonists in urgency and nocturia

The overactive bladder (OAB) syndrome is defined as urgency, with or without urgency incontinence, usually accompanied by frequency and nocturia. Muscarinic receptor antagonists are the most established form of treatment for OAB, but until recently their effectiveness was only confirmed for symptoms of incontinence and frequency. In recent studies, selected muscarinic antagonists, including darifenacin, solifenacin, tolterodine and trospium, significantly reduced the number of urgency episodes per day relative to placebo. While some data raise the possibility that certain of these agents may be more effective than others in this regard, this variability in their effect on urgency needs to be confirmed in future studies. Moreover, it remains to be determined whether counting the number of urgency episodes or assessing the subjective intensity of the sensation of urgency more adequately reflects patient needs and therapeutic efficacy. For nocturia, muscarinic receptor antagonists have only inconsistently shown statistically greater effects than placebo. This inconsistency may relate to the multifactorial nature of nocturia, which even in patients with OAB can have many causes, not all of which may respond/be sensitive to muscarinic receptor antagonism.

Recent developments in the management of overactive bladder: focus on the efficacy and tolerability of once daily solifenacin succinate 5 mg

BACKGROUND

Overactive bladder (OAB) is a highly prevalent symptom complex that may be extremely distressing to the patient, and can be associated with co-morbidities and reduced quality of life (QoL). One of the major pathophysiological causes of OAB is overactivity of the detrusor muscle, mediated via muscarinic receptors in the bladder. Urgency is the defining symptom of OAB, yet a significant proportion of patients also suffer from incontinence, which is the most distressing symptom to the patient. As such, restoration of continence should be a primary treatment goal. However, effective treatments should also impact on the other key symptoms of OAB, such as micturition frequency and urgency. Non-pharmacologic interventions to treat OAB can be effective but require patients to be highly motivated. In terms of pharmacologic therapy, treatment with an antimuscarinic agent is the mainstay of current therapy. Solifenacin succinate is a once-daily oral antimuscarinic for the treatment of OAB. The recommended dose is 5mg once daily and can be increased to 10 mg once daily if 5 mg is well tolerated.

OBJECTIVES

This paper reviews clinical experience with solifenacin 5 mg in patients with OAB as this is the recommended dose according to FDA product labeling.

FINDINGS

In Phase 3 studies, based on data captured in 3-day micturition diaries, greater than half of patients who were incontinent at baseline no longer reported experiencing incontinence episodes after 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with solifenacin 5 mg. Furthermore, compared with placebo, solifenacin treatment resulted in statistically significant reductions in incontinence episodes, micturition frequency and urgency episodes, with significant increases in volume voided (based on an analysis of key symptom outcomes in two pooled Phase 3 studies presented here). The most common treatment-related adverse events were expected anticholinergic side effects (dry mouth, constipation, and blurred vision), and these were generally mild to moderate. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events in the treatment and placebo groups were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Solifenacin 5 mg was found to be efficacious and had an acceptable tolerability profile in patients with OAB in these trials and this treatment may provide QoL benefits to patients.