Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of silodosin in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCT) on the efficacy and safety of silodosin for the treatment of BPH were retrieved from Medline (1966-2012),Embase (1988-2012),Cochrane liberary,CMCC (1979-2012),CNK1 (1979-2012) and the quality of the included RCTs were evaluated using Cochrane systematic evaluation to analyze the data statistically using Rev Man 5.1.0 software.Results Six RCTs involving 2543 participants were included for the meta-analysis.Results of analysis showed that silodosin was effective in the treatment of BPH in term of total international prostate symptom score (IPSS) (standard mean difference (SMD) =2.92,95 ％ CI =2.19-3.65,P ＜ 0.05),voiding symptom score (SMD =1.92,95％ CI =1.44-2.39,P ＜0.05),storage symptom score (SMD =0.92,95％ CI=0.60-1.24,P ＜0.05),and maximum flow rate (Qmax) score (SMD =1.56,95％ CI=1.38-1.75,P ＜ 0.05),compared with the placebo.Silodosin 8 mg was more effective than tamsulosin 0.2 mg in term of IPSS-related parameters and Qmax (P ＜ 0.05).Silodosin 8mg and tamsulosin 0.4 mg were similarly effective in all the efficacy analyses.Abnormal ejaculation was less common with tamsulosin 0.2 mg and 0.4mg (P＜0.05); overall adverse events were similar with tamsulosin 0.2 and 0.4 mg (P ＜0.05).Conclusions Silodosin was significantly more effective than placebo and tamsulosin 0.2 mg in improving symptoms and as effective as tamsulosin 0.4 mg.For adverse events,abnormal ejaculation was more common with silodosin.

PURPOSE: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mirabegron add-on therapy to solifenacin for patients with overactive bladder (OAB). METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify all randomized, double-blind, controlled trials (RCTs) of this combination (mirabegron and solifenacin) for OAB. Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched. A manual search was also performed to investigate relevant references from the retrieved studies. RESULTS: Four publications describing 5 RCTs that compared combination therapy with solifenacin, including a total of 3,309 patients, were analyzed. The mean number of micturitions per 24 hours (mean difference [MD], -0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.65 to -0.26; P < 0.00001), number of episodes of incontinence per 24 hours (MD, -0.71; 95% CI, -0.14 to -0.02; P=0.04), volume voided per micturition, and number of urgency episodes per 24 hours demonstrated that combination therapy was more effective than solifenacin therapy alone. Safety assessments, including common treatment-emergent adverse events (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.95–1.27; P=0.23) and discontinuations due to adverse events (P=0.30), demonstrated that the combination therapy was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that mirabegron therapy as an add-on to solifenacin provides a satisfactory therapeutic effect for OAB symptoms with a low occurrence of side effects.
Humans ; Solifenacin Succinate* ; Urinary Bladder, Overactive* ; Urination

Purpose: Transcutaneous electrical neural stimulation (TENS), as a non-invasive modality, has been clinically used as an alternative treatment for children with overactive bladder (OAB). We conducted a pooled analysis to explore the effect of TENS on OAB. Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guideline was followed in this study. The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, as well as the reference lists of the retrieved studies, were used to find trials relevant for assessing the use of TENS to treat OAB. Results: Of the 246 records identified, 8 publications were analyzed in our study. Our analysis found that TENS resulted in a greater decrease of wet days/wk, daily voiding frequency, daily incontinence episodes, and daily number of voids than was observed in the control group. Furthermore, TENS-treated patients showed similar visual analogue scale (VAS) scores to patients in the control group, demonstrating that the application of TENS did not increase patients’ discomfort and pain. TENS had a relative advantage in the number of partial responses, but no clear differences were found in frequency of no response or a full response compared to the control group. In urodynamic testing, TENS led to obvious improvements in average voided volume and maximum voided volume in children with OAB. Conclusions TENS had a remarkable effect on the improvement of urodynamic indexes and objective OAB symptoms without a significant increase in VAS scores for children with OAB.

PURPOSE: OnabotulinumtoxinA is used widely for the treatment of neurogenic detrusor overactivity. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess its efficacy and safety for neurogenic detrusor overactivity treatment. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to identify all published randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of onabotulinumtoxinA for neurogenic detrusor overactivity treatment. MEDLINE, Embase, and the CENTRAL were employed. Reference lists of retrieved studies were reviewed carefully. RESULTS: Six publications involving 871 patients, which compared onabotulinumtoxinA with a placebo were analyzed. Efficacy of onabotulinumtoxinA treatment was shown as a reduction of the mean number of urinary incontinence episodes per day (mean difference, -1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.70 to -1.12; P<0.00001), maximum cystometric capacity (135.48; 95% CI, 118.22–152.75; P<0.00001), and maximum detrusor pressure (-32.98; 95% CI, -37.33 to -28.62; P<0.00001). Assessment of adverse events revealed that complications due to onabotulinumtoxinA injection were localized primarily to the urinary tract. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that onabotulinumtoxinA is an effective treatment for neurogenic detrusor overactivity with localized advent events.
Humans ; Urinary Incontinence ; Urinary Tract

Objective:To compare the perioperative outcomes and safety of percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) and retrograde ureteral stenting (RUS) in the treatment of acute obstructive upper urinary tract infection.Methods:A comprehensive search was performed on the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify relevant literatures. The retrieval period was from the establishment of the database to August 2022. Inclusion criteria: ①Randomized controlled trial (RCT) of PCN and RUS in the treatment of acute obstructive upper urinary tract infection; ②Studies provided accurate data for analysis, including the total number of subjects and the results of each index; ③The full text of the study was available, and different literatures published in the same cohort were included in the newly published data. ④The observation indexes included the time for the recovery of body temperature, creatinine, leukocyte, operation, radiation exposure, postoperative fever, postoperative pain, and the incidence of postoperative fistulotomy or stent displacement. Exclusion criteria: ①non-RCT study; ②unable to obtain the full text. Two researchers independently screened the literature and evaluated the literature quality, and all the statistical data were analyzed by RevMan5.3 software.Results:Seven trials enrolled 727 patients were included in the meta-analysis, 412 in the PCN group and 315 in the RUS group included. Meta-analysis revealed that the advantages of PCN were lower incidence of postoperative hematuria ( OR=0.54, 95% CI 0.30-0.99, P=0.040) and lower incidence of insertion failure ( OR=0.42, 95% CI 0.21-0.81, P=0.010), but the fluoroscopy time of RUS group was shorter than that of PCN group ( MD=0.31, 95% CI 0.14-0.48, P<0.01). Moreover, there was no significant difference in time to normalization of temperature, time to normalization of creatinine, time to normalization of WBC, operative time, postoperative fever, postoperative pain, postoperative nephrostomy tube or stent slippage rate between the two surgical methods( P>0.05). Conclusions:The radiation exposure time of PCN was longer than that of RUS, but the incidence of postoperative hematuria and catheterization failure was lower than that of RUS.

Purpose: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of imidafenacin for overactive bladder (OAB) induced by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in men receiving alpha-blocker monotherapy. Methods: We performed a systematic research of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, and searched for studies about alpha-blocker with or without imidafenacin treatment for OAB in patients with BPH. We also investigated the original references of the included texts. Results: Four randomized controlled trials including 779 participants with BPH (389 in the alpha-blocker+imidafenacin group and 390 in the alpha-blocker only group) were studied. The main efficacy endpoint was the Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, which showed a mean difference of -1.88 (95% confidence interval, -2.32 to -1.44; P<0.00001), suggesting that alpha-blocker and imidafenacin treatment was effective in treating men with OAB. As other primary efficacy end points, the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) total score (P=0.47), the IPSS storage symptom score (P=0.07), the IPSS voiding symptom score (P=0.60), and the IPSS quality of life score (P=0.18) indicated that 2 methods had no significant differences in treating men with OAB. In terms of safety, which was assessed using postvoid residual volume (P=0.05) and maximum flow rate (P=0.53), the analysis suggested that combination treatment was very well tolerated. Conclusions This study suggested that imidafenacin plus alpha-blocker was an efficacious and safe treatment for OAB symptoms in BPH patients.