Trial reportFemale pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery2021
Comparison of 100 U With 200 U of Intradetrusor OnabotulinumToxinA for Nonneurogenic Urgency Incontinence.
Trial report in Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative Techniques for the Use of Botulinum Toxin in Overactive Bladder: Results of a Multinational Online Survey of Urogynecologists in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Predicting outcomes after intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxina for non-neurogenic urgency incontinence in women.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe objective of this study was to compare efficacy and adverse events between 100 U and 200 U of onabotulinumtoxinA for 6 months in women with nonneurogenic urgency incontinence.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of 2 multicenter randomized controlled trials assessing efficacy of onabotulinumtoxinA in women with nonneurogenic urgency incontinence; one compared 100 U to anticholinergics and the other 200 U to sacral neuromodulation. Of 307 women who received onabotulinumtoxinA injections, 118 received 100 U, and 189 received 200 U. The primary outcome was mean adjusted change in daily urgency incontinence episodes from baseline over 6 months, measured on monthly bladder diaries. Secondary outcomes included perceived improvement, quality of life, and adverse events. The primary outcome was assessed via a multivariate linear mixed model.
resultsWomen receiving 200 U had a lower mean reduction in urgency incontinence episodes by 6 months compared with 100 U (-3.65 vs -4.28 episodes per day; mean difference, 0.63 episodes per day [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.05-1.20]). Women receiving 200 U had lower perceptions of improvement (adjusted odds ratio, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.14-0.75]) and smaller improvement in severity score (adjusted mean difference, 12.0 [95% CI, 5.63-18.37]). Upon subanalysis of only women who were treated with prior anticholinergic medications, these differences between onabotulinumtoxinA doses were no longer statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events in women receiving 200 U (catheterization, 32% vs 23%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.4 [95% CI, 0.8-2.4]; urinary tract infection, 37% vs 27%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.5 [95% CI, 0.9-2.6]).
conclusionsA higher dose of onabotulinumtoxinA may not directly result in improved outcomes, but rather baseline disease severity may be a more important prediction of outcomes.
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.