ArticleInternational journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association2024
Outcomes of sequential third-line therapies in patients with refractory overactive bladder.
Article in International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Sacral Neuromodulation and Intradetrusor Onabotulinum Toxin in the Management of Stroke Associated Urinary Incontinence.International neurourology journal · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSacral neuromodulation (SNM) and onabotulinumtoxinA (BoNTA) injection are third-line therapies for overactive bladder (OAB). Although the efficacy of each third-line treatment has been well established in clinical trials, there is far less information about performing one third-line therapy after the other. Our aim is thus to investigate the outcomes of post-SNM BoNTA and post-BoNTA SNM as "second" third-line treatments.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed all OAB patients who had both SNM and BoNTA between 2013 and 2022. The primary endpoint was the response rates (>50% improvements) of the second third-line treatments. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of the patients who achieved total dry, the duration of treatments of patients who had significant responses, and risk factors that are associated with treatment response or duration of treatments.
resultsA total of 172 patients had two third-line therapies. There were 104 patients who had post-SNM BoNTA and 68 patients who had post-BoNTA SNM. In the post-SNM BoNTA group, 62.5% (65/104) had significant responses after BoNTA treatment. In the post-BoNTA SNM group, 61.8% (44/68) had significant responses after SNM treatment. The proportions of patients who became dry were 21.2% and 23.5%, respectively. In the post-SNM BoNTA group, spinal pathology is associated with a lower probability of a significant response (48.9% vs. 73.7%, p-value = 0.0105).
conclusionsBoNTA or SNM remains a viable option for refractory OAB after patients fail from one another. Spinal pathology is associated with a poorer response of post-SNM BoNTA.
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.