Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial of peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation vs solifenacin in treatment-naive patients with overactive bladder

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00843989%3A_____%2F23%3AE0110248" target="_blank" >RIV/00843989:_____/23:E0110248 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/61988987:17110/23:A2402N70 RIV/62690094:18470/23:50020443

Result on the web

<a href="https://www.auajournals.org/doi/10.1097/JU.0000000000003141" target="_blank" >https://www.auajournals.org/doi/10.1097/JU.0000000000003141</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003141" target="_blank" >10.1097/JU.0000000000003141</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial of peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation vs solifenacin in treatment-naive patients with overactive bladder

Original language description

Purpose: We investigated the safety and efficacy of peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation using the URIS neuromodulation system in a home-based setting in comparison with standard treatment using solifenacin in treatment-naive female patients with overactive bladder. Materials and methods: A total of 120 patients were screened, of whom 77 were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to 12 weeks of treatment with daily peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation or solifenacin 5 mg. The primary endpoint was safety; efficacy assessments included proportion of responders, defined as subjects with ?50% reduction in bladder diary-derived variables; Overactive Bladder-Validated 8-question Screener, and European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions questionnaire; and treatment satisfaction after 12 weeks of therapy. Results: Seventy-one out of 77 randomized patients completed the study. In the peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation group 6/51 (12%) patients reported a treatment-related adverse event vs 12/25 (48%) in the solifenacin group (P < .001). No clinically significant changes were observed in any other safety endpoint. The proportions of responders in the peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation group vs the solifenacin group were 87% vs 74% with respect to Patient Perception of Intensity of Urgency Scale grade 3 urgency episodes, 87% vs 75% with respect to grade 3+4 urgency episodes, and 90% vs 94% with respect to urgency incontinence episodes. In post hoc analyses we observed significant improvement over time in multiple efficacy variables in both treatment arms. Conclusions: Peroneal electrical transcutaneous neuromodulation is a safe and effective method for overactive bladder treatment associated with a significantly lower incidence of treatment-related adverse events compared to solifenacin and a considerably better benefit-risk profile.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30217 - Urology and nephrology

Project

—

Continuities

V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Publication year

2023

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Journal of urology

ISSN

0022-5347

e-ISSN

1527-3792

Volume of the periodical

209

Issue of the periodical within the volume

4

Country of publishing house

US - UNITED STATES

Number of pages

8

Pages from-to

734-741

UT code for WoS article

000970541400026

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85149978980