Department of Ultrasound, Panzhihua Municipal Central Hospital, Panzhihua, 617067, Sichuan Province, China.
Department of Administration, Panzhihua Municipal Central Hospital, Panzhihua, 617067, Sichuan Province, China.
Adv Ther. 2021 Aug;38(8):4163-4177. doi: 10.1007/s12325-021-01831-6. Epub 2021 Jun 27.
Electromyographic biofeedback (EMG-BF) can be regarded as an adjuvant to pelvic floor muscle (PFM) training (PFMT) for the management of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy of PFMT with and without EMG-BF on the cure and improvement rate, PFM strength, urinary incontinence score, and quality of sexual life for the treatment of SUI or pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD). PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang, and CNKI were systematically searched for studies published up to January 2021. The outcomes were the cure and improvement rate, symptom-related score, pelvic floor muscle strength change, and sexual life quality. Twenty-one studies (comprising 1967 patients with EMG-BF + PFMT and 1898 with PFMT) were included. Compared with PFMT, EMG-BF + PFMT had benefits regarding the cure and improvement rate in SUI (OR 4.82, 95% CI 2.21-10.51, P < 0.001; I = 85.3%, P < 0.001) and in PFD (OR 2.81, 95% CI 2.04-3.86, P < 0.001; I = 13.1%, P = 0.331), and in quality of life using the I-QOL tool (SMD 1.47, 95% CI 0.69-2.26, P < 0.001; I = 90.1%, P < 0.001), quality of sexual life using the FSFI tool (SMD 2.86, 95% CI 0.47-5.25, P = 0.019; I = 98.7%, P < 0.001), urinary incontinence using the ICI-Q-SF tool (SMD - 0.62, 95% CI - 1.16, - 0.08, P = 0.024), PFM strength (SMD 1.72, 95% CI 1.08-2.35, P < 0.001; I = 91.4%, P < 0.001), and urodynamics using Qmax (SMD 0.84, 95% CI 0.57-1.10, P < 0.001; I = 0%, P = 0.420) and MUCP (SMD 1.54, 95% CI 0.66-2.43, P = 0.001; I = 81.8%, P = 0.019). There was limited evidence of publication bias. PFMT combined with EMG-BF achieves better outcomes than PFMT alone in SUI or PFD management.
肌电图生物反馈(EMG-BF)可被视为盆底肌(PFM)训练(PFMT)的辅助手段,用于治疗压力性尿失禁(SUI)。本荟萃分析旨在比较 PFMT 联合与不联合 EMG-BF 治疗 SUI 或盆底功能障碍(PFD)时在治愈率和改善率、PFM 强度、尿失禁评分和性生活质量方面的疗效。系统检索了截至 2021 年 1 月发表的 PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science、万方和中国知网的研究。结局指标为治愈率和改善率、症状相关评分、盆底肌力量变化和性生活质量。纳入了 21 项研究(包括 1967 例接受 EMG-BF+PFMT 和 1898 例接受 PFMT 的患者)。与 PFMT 相比,EMG-BF+PFMT 对 SUI(OR 4.82,95%CI 2.21-10.51,P<0.001;I=85.3%,P<0.001)和 PFD(OR 2.81,95%CI 2.04-3.86,P<0.001;I=13.1%,P=0.331)的治愈率和改善率,以及 I-QOL 工具(SMD 1.47,95%CI 0.69-2.26,P<0.001;I=90.1%,P<0.001)、FSFI 工具(SMD 2.86,95%CI 0.47-5.25,P=0.019;I=98.7%,P<0.001)的性生活质量评分,ICI-Q-SF 工具(SMD -0.62,95%CI -1.16,-0.08,P=0.024)的尿失禁评分,PFM 强度(SMD 1.72,95%CI 1.08-2.35,P<0.001;I=91.4%,P<0.001)和 Qmax(SMD 0.84,95%CI 0.57-1.10,P<0.001;I=0%,P=0.420)和 MUCP(SMD 1.54,95%CI 0.66-2.43,P=0.001;I=81.8%,P=0.019)的尿流率的改善更有益。存在有限的发表偏倚证据。PFMT 联合 EMG-BF 在治疗 SUI 或 PFD 方面优于单独使用 PFMT。