ReviewWorld journal of urology2012
Botulinum toxin treatment for overactive bladder and detrusor overactivity in adults.
Review in World journal of urology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo review the evidence in support of botulinum toxin (BoNT-A) for overactive bladder and detrusor overactivity in adults.
methodsA search of Medline and Pubmed was undertaken using the search terms 'botulinum toxin' with 'overactive bladder', 'detrusor overactivity', 'randomised trial' and 'trial'. A narrative review was undertaken based on the papers identified.
resultsOnly four randomised trials reporting the effects of botulinum toxin in this group of patients exist, alongside three systematic reviews and numerous uncontrolled series. Overall, BoNT-A appears an effective treatment modality, with significant and clinically meaningful reductions in urinary symptoms. Urgency and urgency incontinence episodes appear more responsive than absolute frequency. The side effect profile can be predicted from the mode of action of BoNT-A and includes voiding difficulty and urinary tract infection. Few data exist comparing the efficacy and safety of different doses, nor directly comparing the two common preparations, onabotulintum toxin A with apobotulinum toxin A. The cost-effectiveness of BoNT-A remains to be fully evaluated.
conclusionsBoNT-A is an emerging treatment for overactive bladder and detrusor overactivity. The data available to date are of moderate quality with few large randomised trials. However, the drug appears to be effective and safe, although further work is required to identify the most cost-effective dose and treatment interval for maximum benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.