Neurostimulation Therapy for Non-neurogenic Overactive Bladder in Children: A Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of neurostimulation for non-neurogenic overactive bladder in children, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on August 2016. RCTs were evaluated according to the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias assessment. Number of patients with post-treatment partial response (PR) (50%-89%), complete response (CR) (≥90%), and full response (FR) (100%) were extracted for relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Effect estimates were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method with random effect model if significant inter-study heterogeneity (P <.1) was noted. Subgroup analysis was performed according to each treatment setting (PROSPERO CRD42016043502).

RESULTS

Five eligible studies (245 patients) were included. Overall effect estimates showed that compared with standard urotherapy, neurostimulation demonstrated significantly better ≥50% (PR + CR + FR) response (RR = 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.2), but not ≥90% (CR + FR) response (RR = 8.28, 95% CI 0.65-105.92). Clinic-based neurostimulation had significantly better treatment outcomes for both ≥50% (PR + CR + FR) and ≥90% (CR + FR) responses (RR = 3.24, 95% CI 1.89-5.57; RR = 20.81, 95% CI 2.97-145.59, respectively), whereas a self-administered regimen showed no differences for both ≥50% (PR + CR + FR) and ≥90% (CR + FR) response rates between treatment groups (RR = 2.61, 95% CI 0.48-14.15; RR = 3.55, 95% CI 0.19-67.82, respectively). No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSION

Neurostimulation therapy may lead to better partial improvement of non-neurogenic overactive bladder; however, it may not render a definitive complete response. Office-based neurostimulation seems more efficacious than self-administered neurostimulation. Further RCTs are needed to compare outcomes of the 2 regimens.