SynthesisNeurourology and urodynamics2025
The Clinical Significance of the Subtypes of Detrusor Overactivity: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2025. 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.
- Urodynamic characteristics and clinical significance of detrusor overactivity in early (≤6 months) male urinary incontinence following TURP and RARP: a descriptive analysis of two cohorts.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Urodynamic characteristics of different types of detrusor overactivity in patients with benign prostatic obstruction.Frontiers in 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDetrusor overactivity (DO) is the "occurrence of detrusor contraction(s) during filling cystometry" [7] and can be "phasic" or "terminal" [26]. The aim of this systematic review was to establish whether there is any clinical significance between the different subtypes of DO in terms of demographics, underlying pathophysiology, symptoms, other urodynamic parameters and response to treatment.
methodsA systematic search was performed using PubMed, Cochrane, MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE databases in February 2024, following the PRISMA guidelines. The Newcastle Ottawa critical appraisal tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies.
resultsThe search identified 16 relevant studies including eight prospective and eight retrospective studies. Patients with terminal DO were found to be significantly older (p = 0.0003) and were more likely to have suffered spinal cord trauma (p = 0.04) compared to those with phasic DO. Patients with terminal DO were also found to have higher symptom scores and more likely to also suffer with incontinence than those with phasic DO. Patients with terminal DO were found to have smaller functional capacities than those with phasic DO on urodynamics. Success rates, following trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP), were 69.2% for patients with phasic DO and 9.5% for those with terminal DO.
conclusionPatients with terminal DO are more likely to be older, suffer with worse symptoms, have smaller bladder capacities and respond less favourably to treatment than those with phasic DO. Future studies incorporating DO should consider analysing these two sub-types of DO as separate clinical entities.
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.