ArticleBMC urology2024
Efficacy and safety of solifenacin combined with biofeedback in children with overactive bladder.
Article in BMC urology, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral solifenacin suspension in the management valve bladder: a pilot study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOveractive bladder is a common chronic urological disorder in children, liable to impact normal social activities, disrupt sleep and even impair self-esteem. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of solifenacin combined with biofeedback for paediatric overactive bladder.
methodForty-five children with overactive bladder were enrolled and divided into three groups: 15 patients in Group A were treated with solifenacin, 15 cases in Group B with biofeedback, and the other 15 patients in Group C with the combination of solifenacin plus biofeedback. Each group was subdivided into the non-urge incontinence (non-UI) and urge incontinence (UI) groups. The remission rates were compared among the three groups at 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks from the beginning of treatment. The side effects of solifenacin were recorded and followed up.
resultAfter 2 weeks since initial treatment, the complete response rates were 33.3% (5/15), 20.0% (3/15), and 53.3% (8/15) in the three groups. At 4 weeks, the complete remission rates were 46.7% (7/15), 33.3% (5/15), and 60.0% (9/15) respectively. Moreover, the complete remission rates of the UI groups were higher than the non-UI groups (p < 0.05). At 8 weeks, the complete response rates were 53.3% (8/15), 40.0% (6/15), and 67.7% (10/15). At 12 weeks, the complete response rates were 67.8% (10/15), 60.0% (9/15), and 86.7% (13/15). The complete response rates were higher and urodynamic parameters were improved obviously in group C than the other two groups (p < 0.05) during the follow-ups. The median voiding frequency decreased and median functional bladder capacity increased obviously in Group C after 4 weeks (p < 0.05). Dry mouth was observed in 2 patients (4.4%). 2 patients experienced constipation (4.4%), and neither case was severe. The symptoms of these four patients had relieved by reducing the dose of solifenacin.
conclusionSolifenacin combined with biofeedback had good efficacy and compliance for children experiencing overactive bladder. It took only 2 weeks to achieve the complete response rate over 50%, especially for the improvement of UI symptoms.
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.