Moyson J, Legrand F, Vanden Bossche M, Quackels T, Roumeguère T
Hôpital universitaire Erasme ULB, 808, route de Lennik, 1070 Bruxelles, Belgique.
Hôpital universitaire Erasme ULB, 808, route de Lennik, 1070 Bruxelles, Belgique.
Prog Urol. 2017 Mar;27(4):203-228. doi: 10.1016/j.purol.2016.12.011. Epub 2017 Feb 20.
Study the efficacy and adverse events of different pharmacological lines in the treatment of idiopathic overactive bladder (iOAB).
PubMed research on meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials (RCT) focused on the efficacy and adverse effects of anticholinergics, botulinum toxin and mirabegron since 2005.
Ten meta-analyses of anticholinergics were selected; 16 randomized controlled trials (ERC) comparing botulinum toxin A to either anticholinergic or placebo and 10 ERC studying mirabegron. All the molecules studied showed efficacy compared to placebo in the treatment of iOAB. Anticholinergics remain the first-line pharmacological treatment allowing a significant reduction in the number (nb) of incontinence (-5/week) and in the number of urination (-4/week) as well as a perception of subjective improvement of the symptoms reported by 56 % of the patients treated against 41 % for the placebo group (RR: 1.39 [95 % CI: 1.28-1.51]). The most commonly reported side effect is dry mouth (30 % vs. 8 % in the placebo group). Injections of botulinum toxin A appear to be relatively comparable to anticholinergics in the first line with a decrease in urinary emergency incontinence (UTI) of 3.3/d in the toxin group versus 3.4/d in the anticholinergic group (P=0.81). There was also a higher rate of complete resolution of urinary incontinence in the toxin group (27 % vs. 13 % P=0.03) but significant adverse effects such as lower urinary tract infections (33 % vs. 13 % P>0.01). And the risk of using self-catheterization (5 % vs. 0 % P=0.01). In view of the invasive character of the toxin injections and their side effects, this treatment remains a 2nd line therapy. The same is true for mirabegron: similar efficacy (IUU number in the mirabegron group 50mg -1.74 vs. -1.53 In the solifenacin group 5mg, P>0.5) but different side effects with arterial hypertension (the oral dryness rate being comparable to that in the placebo group). The choice of use of anticholinergic or mirabegron should be based on the balance of efficacy/tolerance to be estimated for each patient.
The different molecules have shown their efficacy in the treatment of iOAB with acceptable tolerance. There is a lack of direct comparisons between treatments available. Further studies are needed to evaluate the possible interest of a combination of these molecules as well as the search for predictive factors of response to these different therapies.
研究不同药物治疗特发性膀胱过度活动症(iOAB)的疗效及不良事件。
检索自2005年以来PubMed上关于抗胆碱能药物、肉毒杆菌毒素和米拉贝隆疗效及不良反应的荟萃分析和随机对照试验(RCT)。
选取了10项抗胆碱能药物的荟萃分析;16项比较A型肉毒杆菌毒素与抗胆碱能药物或安慰剂的随机对照试验(RCT)以及10项研究米拉贝隆的RCT。所有研究的药物在治疗iOAB方面与安慰剂相比均显示出疗效。抗胆碱能药物仍是一线药物治疗,可显著减少尿失禁次数(-5次/周)和排尿次数(-4次/周),56%接受治疗的患者主观症状有改善,而安慰剂组为41%(RR:1.39 [95% CI:1.28 - 1.51])。最常报告的副作用是口干(30% vs. 安慰剂组的8%)。A型肉毒杆菌毒素注射在一线治疗中似乎与抗胆碱能药物效果相当,毒素组尿急尿失禁(UTI)减少3.3次/天,抗胆碱能药物组减少3.4次/天(P = 0.81)。毒素组尿失禁完全缓解率也更高(27% vs. 13%,P = 0.03),但有显著不良事件,如下尿路感染(33% vs. 13%,P>0.01)以及使用自我导尿的风险(5% vs. 0%,P = 0.01)。鉴于毒素注射的侵入性及其副作用,这种治疗仍是二线疗法。米拉贝隆也是如此:疗效相似(米拉贝隆50mg组的IUU次数为-1.74,索利那新5mg组为-1.53,P > 0.5),但副作用不同,有动脉高血压(口干率与安慰剂组相当)。抗胆碱能药物或米拉贝隆的使用选择应基于对每位患者疗效/耐受性平衡的评估。
不同药物在治疗iOAB方面已显示出疗效且耐受性可接受。现有治疗之间缺乏直接比较。需要进一步研究来评估这些药物联合使用的潜在益处以及寻找对这些不同疗法反应的预测因素。