ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2017
OnabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of idiopathic overactive bladder is effective and safe for repeated use.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe objective of this study was to compare efficacy and safety outcomes between patients receiving onabotulinum-toxinA (OnabotA) for the first time and those receiving a repeat injection.
methodsData collected before and after OnabotA injection were extracted from a clinical registry. Patients were classified into either first or repeat injection subgroups. Efficacy was measured by the change in use of oral bladder medications, the number of voids per day or night, the frequency of urinary incontinence (UI) episodes, and patient-reported outcomes. Safety was measured by the number of self-reported complications. Differences in safety measures between the subgroups were tested.
resultsThe analysis included complete data from 81 patients; 30 (37%) receiving OnabotA for the first time, 51 (63%) receiving a repeat injection. Both subgroups reported significant reductions in the use of anticholinergics, more tolerable bladder symptoms, and improvements in patient-reported outcomes. Dry rates were similarly high in both groups (50% and 43%, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences between the subgroups in terms of their safety outcomes.
conclusionsOnabotA is equally as efficacious and safe for patients with overactive bladder receiving a repeat injection as it is for those receiving their first injection.
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.