ReviewActa neurologica Belgica2026
Non-invasive neuromodulation for LUTS in Parkinson's disease: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of tibial nerve stimulation with GRADE evaluation.
Review in Acta neurologica Belgica, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are a common and burdensome part of Parkinson's disease (PD). Conventional treatments are inconsistently effective, making minimally invasive options like tibial nerve stimulation (TNS) promising. However, evidence for TNS in PD patients remains limited and varied. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of TNS (percutaneous and transcutaneous) for LUTS in patients with PD, focusing on both subjective symptom outcomes and objective urodynamic parameters through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
methodsA systematic search identified relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective single-arm studies on PTNS efficacy. Data were analyzed using RevMan Cochrane software (v5.4) and R (v4.3.2), with results pooled as mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals. Meta-regression assessed the influence of PD duration.
resultsSeven studies (three RCTs and four prospective cohorts) were included in this review, with a total of 591 participants. TNS improved urodynamic outcomes, including first involuntary detrusor contraction volume (+ 107.49 mL, 95% CI 99.43 to 115.56), maximum cystometric capacity (+ 90 mL, 95% CI 83.14 to 96.84), and detrusor pressures (Pdetmax and PdetQmax reductions). In contrast, pooled evidence remained heterogeneous and inconsistent for patient-reported outcomes, including urgency, frequency, incontinence, and nocturia. Meta-regression analysis revealed no significant association between PD duration and treatment response.
conclusionsTNS improved urodynamic function in PD patients, but this objective improvement does not consistently translate to subjective symptom relief, highlighting the complexity of PD-related LUTS. Future adoption requires larger, standardized RCTs with extended follow-up to identify which patients benefit most.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42631842What 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.