-
PloS One 2024We conducted a systematic evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in alleviating ureteral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
Comparison of the efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in improving ureteral stent-related symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
We conducted a systematic evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in alleviating ureteral stent-related symptoms.
METHODS
Until August 2023, we conducted a comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and complications of tolterodine and α-adrenergic receptor blockers in treating ureteral stent-related symptoms. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. The scores from various domains of the Ureteral Stent Symptom Questionnaire (USSQ) were summarized and compared, and statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.0 software.
RESULTS
A total of 8 studies met the inclusion criteria for our analysis. These studies were conducted at different centers. All studies were randomized controlled trials, involving a total of 487 patients, with 244 patients receiving α-adrenergic receptor blockers and 243 patients receiving tolterodine. The results showed that tolterodine demonstrated significantly better improvement in body pain (MD, 1.56; 95% CI [0.46, 2.66]; p = 0.005) (MD, 0.46; 95% CI [0.12, 0.80]; p = 0.008) (MD, 3.21; 95% CI [1.89, 4.52]; p = 0.00001) among patients after ureteral stent placement compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers at different time points. Additionally, at 4 weeks, tolterodine showed superior improvement in general health (MD, 0.15; 95% CI [0.03, 0.27]; p = 0.01) and urinary symptoms (MD, 1.62; 95% CI [0.59, 2.66]; p = 0.002) compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers, while at 6 weeks, tolterodine showed better improvement in work performance (MD, -1.60; 95% CI [-2.73, -0.48]; p = 0.005) compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers. Additionally, the incidence of dry mouth (RR, 4.21; 95% CI [1.38, 12.87]; p = 0.01) is higher with the use of tolterodine compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers. However, there were no significant statistical differences between the two drugs in other outcomes.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis suggests that tolterodine is superior to α-adrenergic receptor blockers in improving physical pain symptoms after ureteral stent placement, while α-adrenergic receptor blockers are more effective than tolterodine in enhancing work performance. Additionally, the incidence of dry mouth is higher with the use of tolterodine compared to α-adrenergic receptor blockers. However, higher-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to further investigate this issue.
Topics: Tolterodine Tartrate; Humans; Stents; Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists; Ureter; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38701097
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0302716 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2024Antipsychotic-induced akathisia (AIA) occurs in 14% to 35% of patients treated with antipsychotics and is associated with increased suicide and decreased adherence in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Antipsychotic-induced akathisia (AIA) occurs in 14% to 35% of patients treated with antipsychotics and is associated with increased suicide and decreased adherence in patients with schizophrenia. However, no comprehensive review and network meta-analysis has been conducted to compare the efficacy of treatments for AIA.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy associated with AIA treatments.
DATA SOURCES
Three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were systematically searched by multiple researchers for double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing active drugs for the treatment of AIA with placebo or another treatment between May 30 and June 18, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Selected studies were RCTs that compared adjunctive drugs for AIA vs placebo or adjunctive treatment in patients treated with antipsychotics fulfilling the criteria for akathisia, RCTs with sample size of 10 patients or more, only trials in which no additional drugs were administered during the study, and RCTs that used a validated akathisia score. Trials with missing data for the main outcome (akathisia score at the end points) were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction and synthesis were performed, estimating standardized mean differences (SMDs) through pairwise and network meta-analysis with a random-effects model. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was the severity of akathisia measured by a validated scale at the last available end point.
RESULTS
Fifteen trials involving 492 participants compared 10 treatments with placebo. Mirtazapine (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -1.20; 95% CI, -1.83 to -0.58), biperiden (6 mg/d for ≥14 days; SMD, -1.01; 95% CI, -1.69 to -0.34), vitamin B6 (600-1200 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.92; 95% CI, -1.57 to -0.26), trazodone (50 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.84; 95% CI, -1.54 to -0.14), mianserin (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.44 to -0.19), and propranolol (20 mg/d for ≥6 days; SMD, -0.78; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.22) were associated with greater efficacy than placebo, with low to moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 34.6%; 95% CI, 0.0%-71.1%). Cyproheptadine, clonazepam, zolmitriptan, and valproate did not yield significant effects. Eight trials were rated as having low risk of bias; 2, moderate risk; and 5, high risk. Sensitivity analyses generally confirmed the results for all drugs except for cyproheptadine and propranolol. No association between effect sizes and psychotic severity was found.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, mirtazapine, biperiden, and vitamin B6 were associated with the greatest efficacy for AIA, with vitamin B6 having the best efficacy and tolerance profile. Trazodone, mianserin, and propranolol appeared as effective alternatives with slightly less favorable efficacy and tolerance profiles. These findings should assist prescribers in selecting an appropriate medication for treating AIA.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Biperiden; Cyproheptadine; Gallopamil; Mianserin; Mirtazapine; Network Meta-Analysis; Propranolol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Trazodone; Vitamin B 6; Akathisia, Drug-Induced
PubMed: 38451521
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.1527 -
Biomedicines Sep 2023Major depressive disorder is one of the most severe mental disorders. It strongly impairs daily functioning, and, in extreme cases, it can lead to suicide. Although... (Review)
Review
Major depressive disorder is one of the most severe mental disorders. It strongly impairs daily functioning, and, in extreme cases, it can lead to suicide. Although different treatment options are available for patients with depression, there is an ongoing search for novel therapeutic agents, such as scopolamine (also known as hyoscine), that would offer higher efficacy, a more rapid onset of action, and a more favorable safety profile. The aim of our study was to review the current clinical evidence regarding the use of scopolamine, a promising therapeutic option in the treatment of depression. A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases up to 5 June 2023. We included randomized placebo-controlled or head-to-head clinical trials that compared the clinical efficacy and safety of scopolamine in the treatment of major depressive disorder. Two reviewers independently conducted the search and study selection and rated the risk of bias for each study. Four randomized controlled trials were identified in the systematic review. The included studies investigated the use of scopolamine administered as an oral, intramuscular, or intravenous drug, alone or in combination with other antidepressants. The results indicated that scopolamine exerts antidepressant effects of varying intensity. We show that not all studies confirmed a statistically and clinically significant reduction of depressive symptoms vs. placebo. A broader perspective on scopolamine use in antidepressant treatment should be confirmed in subsequent large randomized controlled trials assessing both effectiveness and safety. Therefore, studies directly comparing the effectiveness of scopolamine depending on the route of administration are required.
PubMed: 37893010
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines11102636 -
BMC Urology Oct 2023Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) receive α-blockers as first-line therapy to treat lower urinary tract symptoms; however, some individuals still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) receive α-blockers as first-line therapy to treat lower urinary tract symptoms; however, some individuals still experience residual storage symptoms. Antimuscarinics, β3-agonists, and desmopressin are effective add-on medications. Nevertheless, there is currently no evidence for the appropriate choice of the first add-on medication. This systematic review aimed to investigate the clinical benefits of antimuscarinics, β3-agonists, and desmopressin, in addition to α-blockers, for persistent storage symptoms in BPH patients.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of different add-on medications in BPH patients with persistent storage symptoms despite α-blocker treatment was conducted. Clinical outcomes included the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS storage subscore, nocturia, micturition, and urgency. A network meta-analysis was performed to estimate the effect size. Surface under cumulative ranking curves (SUCRAs) were used to rank the included treatments for each outcome.
RESULTS
A total of 15 RCTs were identified. Add-on imidafenacin and mirabegron resulted in significant improvement in all outcomes assessed. Other add-on medications such as desmopressin, tolterodine, solifenacin, fesoterodine, and propiverine showed positive benefits for most, but not all, outcomes. Based on the SUCRA rankings, add-on desmopressin was the best-ranked treatment for IPSS and nocturia, and add-on imidafenacin was the best for the IPSS storage subscore and micturition.
CONCLUSIONS
BPH patients presenting with persistent storage symptoms despite α-blocker administration are recommended to include additional treatment. Desmopressin and imidafenacin may be considered high-priority add-on treatments because of their superior efficacy compared with other medications.
Topics: Male; Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Nocturia; Network Meta-Analysis; Deamino Arginine Vasopressin; Treatment Outcome; Drug Therapy, Combination; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms; Adrenergic alpha-Antagonists
PubMed: 37789333
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-023-01327-1 -
Systematic Reviews Sep 2023Autonomy-supporting interventions, such as self-determination theory and guided self-determination interventions, may improve self-management and clinical and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Autonomy-supporting interventions, such as self-determination theory and guided self-determination interventions, may improve self-management and clinical and psychosocial outcomes in people with diabetes. Such interventions have never been systematically reviewed assessing both benefits and harms and concurrently controlling the risks of random errors using trial sequential analysis methodology. This systematic review investigates the benefits and harms of self-determination theory-based interventions compared to usual care in people with diabetes.
METHODS
We used the Cochrane methodology. Randomized clinical trials assessing interventions theoretically based on guided self-determination or self-determination theory in any setting were eligible. A comprehensive search (latest search April 2022) was undertaken in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, PsycINFO, SCI-EXPANDED, CINAHL, SSCI, CPCI-S, and CPCI-SSH to identify relevant trials. Two authors independently screened, extracted data, and performed risk-of-bias assessment of included trials using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool 1.0. Our primary outcomes were quality of life, all-cause mortality, and serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, and nonserious adverse events not considered serious. Exploratory outcomes were glycated hemoglobin and motivation (autonomy, controlled, amotivation). Outcomes were assessed at the end of the intervention (primary time point) and at maximum follow-up. The analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.4 and Trial Sequential Analysis 0.9.5.10. Certainty of the evidence was assessed by GRADE.
RESULTS
Our search identified 5578 potentially eligible studies of which 11 randomized trials (6059 participants) were included. All trials were assessed at overall high risk of bias. We found no effect of self-determination theory-based interventions compared with usual care on quality of life (mean difference 0.00 points, 95% CI -4.85, 4.86, I = 0%; 225 participants, 3 trials, TSA-adjusted CI -11.83, 11.83), all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, adverse events, glycated hemoglobulin A1c, or motivation (controlled). The certainty of the evidence was low to very low for all outcomes. We found beneficial effect on motivation (autonomous and amotivation; low certainty evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
We found no effect of self-determination-based interventions on our primary or secondary outcomes. The evidence was of very low certainty.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020181144.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Diabetes Mellitus; Glycated Hemoglobin; Glycopyrrolate; MEDLINE
PubMed: 37674180
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02308-z -
BMC Geriatrics Aug 2023Drugs with anticholinergic properties are associated with cognitive adverse effects, especially in patients vulnerable to central muscarinic antagonism. A variety of...
BACKGROUND
Drugs with anticholinergic properties are associated with cognitive adverse effects, especially in patients vulnerable to central muscarinic antagonism. A variety of drugs show weak, moderate or strong anticholinergic effects. Therefore, the cumulative anticholinergic burden should be considered in patients with cognitive impairment. This study aimed to develop a Swedish Anticholinergic Burden Scale (Swe-ABS) to be used in health care and research.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed and Ovid Embase to identify previously published tools quantifying anticholinergic drug burden (i.e., exposure). Drugs and grading scores (0-3, no to high anticholinergic activity) were extracted from identified lists. Enteral and parenteral drugs authorized in Sweden were included. Drugs with conflicting scores in the existing lists were assessed by an expert group. Two drugs that were not previously assessed were also added to the evaluation process.
RESULTS
The systematic literature search identified the following nine anticholinergic burden scales: Anticholinergic Activity Scale, Anticholinergic Burden Classification, updated Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden scale, Anticholinergic Drug Scale, Anticholinergic Load Scale, Anticholinergic Risk Scale, updated Clinician-rated Anticholinergic Scale, German Anticholinergic Burden Scale and Korean Anticholinergic Burden Scale. A list of drugs with significant anticholinergic effects provided by The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare was included in the process. The suggested Swe-ABS consists of 104 drugs scored as having weak, moderate or strong anticholinergic effects. Two hundred and fifty-six drugs were listed as having no anticholinergic effects based on evaluation in previous scales. In total, 62 drugs were assessed by the expert group.
CONCLUSIONS
Swe-ABS is a simplified method to quantify the anticholinergic burden and is easy to use in clinical practice. Publication of this scale might make clinicians more aware of drugs with anticholinergic properties and patients' total anticholinergic burden. Further research is needed to validate the Swe-ABS and evaluate anticholinergic exposure versus clinically significant outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Cholinergic Antagonists; Cognitive Dysfunction; Muscarinic Antagonists; Sweden; Health Status Indicators
PubMed: 37626293
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-023-04225-1 -
International Braz J Urol : Official... 2023bladder based on a systematic review and network meta-analysis approach. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
bladder based on a systematic review and network meta-analysis approach.
METHODS
Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Clinical Trials databases were systematically searched. The search time frame was from database creation to June 2, 2022. Randomized controlled double-blind trials of oral medication for overactive bladder were screened against the protocol's entry criteria. Trials were evaluated for quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool, and data were statistically analyzed using Stata 16.0 software.
RESULT
A total of 60 randomized controlled double-blind clinical trials were included involving 50,333 subjects. Solifenacin 10mg was the most effective in mean daily micturitions and incontinence episodes, solifenacin 5/10mg in mean daily urinary urgency episodes and nocturia episodes, fesoterodine 8mg in urgency incontinence episodes/d and oxybutynin 5mg in voided volume/micturition. In terms of safety, solifenacin 5mg, ER-tolterodine 4mg, mirabegron, vibegron and ER-oxybutynin 10mg all showed a better incidence of dry mouth, fesoterodine 4mg, ER-oxybutynin 10mg, tolterodine 2mg, and vibegron in the incidence of constipation. Compared to placebo, imidafenacin 0.1mg showed a significantly increased incidence in hypertension, solifenacin 10mg in urinary tract infection, fesoterodine 4/8mg and darifenacin 15mg in headache.
CONCLUSION
Solifenacin showed better efficacy. For safety, most anticholinergic drugs were more likely to cause dry mouth and constipation, lower doses were better tolerated. The choice of drugs should be tailored to the patient's specific situation to find the best balance between efficacy and safety.
Topics: Humans; Urinary Bladder, Overactive; Solifenacin Succinate; Tolterodine Tartrate; Network Meta-Analysis; Double-Blind Method; Constipation; Xerostomia; Treatment Outcome; Muscarinic Antagonists; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37506033
DOI: 10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2023.0158 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are inhaled medications used to manage chronic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) plus long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) versus LABA plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
BACKGROUND
Long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are inhaled medications used to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). When two classes of medications are required, a LAMA plus an ICS (LABA+ICS) were previously recommended within a single inhaler as the first-line treatment for managing stable COPD in people in high-risk categories. However, updated international guidance recommends a LAMA plus a LABA (LAMA+LABA). This systematic review is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2017.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the benefits and harms of LAMA+LABA versus LABA+ICS for treatment of people with stable COPD.
SEARCH METHODS
We performed an electronic search of the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Search Portal, followed by handsearches. Two review authors screened the selected articles. The most recent search was run on 10 September 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included parallel or cross-over randomised controlled trials of at least one month's duration, comparing LAMA+LABA and LABA+ICS for stable COPD. We included studies conducted in an outpatient setting and irrespective of blinding.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. We resolved any discrepancies through discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Review Manager 5. Primary outcomes were: participants with one or more exacerbations of COPD; serious adverse events; quality of life, as measured by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score change from baseline; and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV). We used the GRADE framework to rate our certainty of the evidence in each meta-analysis as high, moderate, low or very low. MAIN RESULTS: This review updates the first version of the review, published in 2017, and increases the number of included studies from 11 to 19 (22,354 participants). The median number of participants per study was 700. In each study, between 54% and 91% (median 70%) of participants were males. Study participants had an average age of 64 years and percentage predicted FEV of 51.5% (medians of study means). Included studies had a generally low risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, and reporting biases. All but two studies were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies, which had varying levels of involvement in study design, conduct, and data analysis. Primary outcomes The odds of having an exacerbation were similar for LAMA+LABA compared with LABA+ICS (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06; I = 61%; 13 studies, 20,960 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The odds of having a serious adverse event were also similar (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.15; I = 20%; 18 studies, 23,183 participants; high-certainty evidence). Participants receiving LAMA+LABA had a similar improvement in quality of life, as measured by the SGRQ, to those receiving LABA+ICS (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.36 to 0.21; I = 78%; 9 studies, 14,437 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) but showed a greater improvement in trough FEV (MD 0.07, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.08; I = 73%; 12 studies, 14,681 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes LAMA+LABA decreased the odds of pneumonia compared with LABA+ICS from 5% to 3% (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.72; I = 0%; 14 studies, 21,829 participants; high-certainty evidence) but increased the odds of all-cause death from 1% to 1.4% (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.75; I = 0%; 15 studies, 21,510 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The odds of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of four or more points on the SGRQ were similar between LAMA+LABA and LABA+ICS (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.25; I = 77%; 4 studies, 13,614 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Combination LAMA+LABA therapy probably holds similar benefits to LABA+ICS for exacerbations and quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, for people with moderate to severe COPD, but offers a larger improvement in FEV and a slightly lower risk of pneumonia. There is little to no difference between LAMA+LABA and LAMA+ICS in the odds of having a serious adverse event. Whilst all-cause death may be lower with LABA+ICS, there was a very small number of events in the analysis, translating to a low absolute risk. Findings are based on moderate- to high-certainty evidence from heterogeneous trials with an observation period of less than one year. This review should be updated again in a few years.
Topics: Male; Humans; Middle Aged; Female; Muscarinic Antagonists; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Quality of Life; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Pneumonia
PubMed: 37276335
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012066.pub3 -
European Review For Medical and... May 2023OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to establish the comparison between mirabegron and antimuscarinic agents through the improvement of the urodynamic study (UDS) parameter... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Urodynamic parameter improvements after mirabegron vs. antimuscarinics agents in non-neurogenic overactive bladder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment effect.
OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to establish the comparison between mirabegron and antimuscarinic agents through the improvement of the urodynamic study (UDS) parameter among overactive bladder (OAB) populations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PRISMA checklist and procedure were utilized to standardize our review of studies from scientific databases published between January 2013 and May 2022 in accordance with the applied eligibility criteria. This study mainly focused on UDS parameter improvement; hence, baseline and follow-up completion were mandatory to be included. The quality of each included study was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool in RevMan 5.4.1. RESULTS: We included a total of 5 clinical trials encompassing 430 clinically confirmed OAB individuals. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that the improvement of maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) was more apparent in the mirabegron arm [mean difference (MD), 1.78 (1.31, 2.26); p<0.05] compared to antimuscarinics arm [MD, 0.02 (-2.53, 2.57); p>0.05) as analyzed in random-effect model (REM) analysis within 95% CI. Similar outcomes were also observed on the other UDS parameters related to the bladder's storage function, e.g., post-void residual (PVR) and detrusor overactivity (DO) cases, with most of the MDs favoring mirabegron. CONCLUSIONS: Mirabegron is superior in improving most of the UDS parameter outcomes compared to the antimuscarinics agents though the current guideline should always refer to symptoms improvement. Emphasizing the role of UDS parameter measurements to objectively confirm a therapeutic effect should be considered in the upcoming studies.
Topics: Humans; Muscarinic Antagonists; Urinary Bladder, Overactive; Urodynamics; Urological Agents; Acetanilides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37203811
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202305_32292 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2023Around 16% of adults have symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB; urgency with frequency and/or urge incontinence), with prevalence increasing with age. Anticholinergic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Around 16% of adults have symptoms of overactive bladder (OAB; urgency with frequency and/or urge incontinence), with prevalence increasing with age. Anticholinergic drugs are commonly used to treat this condition. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2006.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of anticholinergic drugs compared with placebo or no treatment for treating overactive bladder syndrome in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 14 January 2020), and the reference lists of relevant articles. We updated this search on 3 May 2022, but these results have not yet been fully incorporated.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials in adults with overactive bladder syndrome that compared an anticholinergic drug alone with placebo treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data from the included studies, including an assessment of the risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of the body of evidence using the GRADE approach. We processed data as described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 104 studies, 71 of which were new or updated for this version of the review. Although 12 studies did not report the number of participants, there were 47,106 people in the remainder of the included studies. The majority of the studies had insufficient information to allow judgement of risk of bias and we judged them to be unclear for all domains. Nine anticholinergic drugs were included in these studies: darifenacin; fesoterodine; imidafenacin; oxybutynin; propantheline; propiverine; solifenacin; tolterodine and trospium. No studies were found that compared anticholinergic drugs to no treatment. At the end of the treatment period, anticholinergics may slightly increase condition-specific quality of life (mean difference (MD) 4.41 lower, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.28 lower to 3.54 lower (scale range -100 to 0); 12 studies, 6804 participants; low-certainty evidence). Anticholinergics are probably better than placebo in terms of patient perception of cure or improvement (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.66; 9 studies, 8457 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and the mean number of urgency episodes per 24-hour period (MD 0.85 lower, 95% CI 1.03 lower to 0.67 lower; 23 studies, 16,875 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, anticholinergics may result in an increase in dry mouth adverse events (RR 3.50, 95% CI 3.26 to 3.75; 66 studies, 38,368 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may result in an increased risk of urinary retention (RR 3.52, 95% CI 2.04 to 6.08; 17 studies, 7862 participants; low-certainty evidence). Taking anticholinergics may be more likely to lead to participants withdrawing from the studies due to adverse events (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56; 61 studies, 36,943 participants; low-certainty evidence). However, taking anticholinergics probably reduces the mean number of micturitions per 24-hour period compared to placebo (MD 0.85 lower, 95% CI 0.98 lower to 0.73 lower; 30 studies, 19,395 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The use of anticholinergic drugs by people with overactive bladder syndrome results in important but modest improvements in symptoms compared with placebo treatment. In addition, recent studies suggest that this is generally associated with only modest improvement in quality of life. Adverse effects were higher with all anticholinergics compared with placebo. Withdrawals due to adverse effects were also higher for all anticholinergics except tolterodine. It is not known whether any benefits of anticholinergics are sustained during long-term treatment or after treatment stops.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cholinergic Antagonists; Quality of Life; Tolterodine Tartrate; Urinary Bladder, Overactive; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37160401
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003781.pub3