Andersson Karl-Erik
Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Lancet Neurol. 2004 Jan;3(1):46-53. doi: 10.1016/s1474-4422(03)00622-7.
For many years, antimuscarinic drugs have been the first-line pharmacological treatment for urgency, frequency, and urge incontinence, all symptoms of the disorder termed overactive bladder. Antimuscarinic treatment is not always effective and is associated with side-effects that limit its clinical use. The clinical significance of the effects of antimuscarinic drugs has been questioned lately. In this review, the rationale for the use of these drugs in the management of overactive bladder is re-examined and the results of treatment are discussed. I conclude that these drugs are the only treatment with undisputed effectiveness in the treatment of overactive bladder. They may not be the perfect treatment for all patients with this disorder, but their value for individual patients should not be underestimated. Further clinical trials with improvement in quality of life as the primary endpoint are needed and may give a fair reflection of the clinical value of antimuscarinic drugs.
多年来,抗毒蕈碱药物一直是尿急、尿频和急迫性尿失禁(统称为膀胱过度活动症的症状)的一线药物治疗方法。抗毒蕈碱治疗并非总是有效,且会产生限制其临床应用的副作用。最近,抗毒蕈碱药物作用的临床意义受到了质疑。在本综述中,重新审视了使用这些药物治疗膀胱过度活动症的基本原理,并讨论了治疗结果。我的结论是,这些药物是治疗膀胱过度活动症唯一具有无可争议疗效的治疗方法。它们可能并非对所有患有该疾病的患者都是完美的治疗方法,但不应低估其对个体患者的价值。需要以生活质量改善为主要终点的进一步临床试验,这可能会公正地反映抗毒蕈碱药物的临床价值。