ArticleNeurourology and urodynamics2021
Testing a new, intensified infusion-withdrawal protocol for urinary urgency provocation in brain-bladder studies.
Article in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe brain's role in bladder control has become an important area of study in the last 15 years. Typically, the brain's role in urinary urgency has been studied by repeated infusion and withdrawal of fluid, per catheter, to provoke urgency sensation during a whole brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan. Since this technique generally requires a large group size, we tested a more intense infusion-withdrawal protocol in an attempt to improve signal to noise ratio and repeatability of the signal which would, in turn, allow us to further probe subtypes of urgency urinary incontinence.
methodsA total of 12 women over the age of 60 were recruited to test a new "intense" infusion withdrawal protocol. They underwent this new protocol during a functional brain MRI scan. The primary outcome was comparison of activity within the insula, medial pre-frontal cortex and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex/supplementary motor area (dACC/SMA). Immediate test-retest repeatability was measured using intraclass correlation. Secondary exploratory evaluation of differences in the whole brain between protocols was conducted.
resultsThere was no significant difference in signal in any of the a priori regions of interest between protocols. Test-retest repeatability in the new protocol was poor compared to the original protocol, and variability was higher. Three participants were not able to tolerate the "intense" protocol.
conclusionThe small improvement in signal to noise ratio of the new protocol was not sufficient to overcome the poorly tolerated intense filling protocol.
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.