Suppr超能文献

盆底电刺激治疗真性压力性尿失禁:一项多中心、安慰剂对照试验。

Pelvic floor electrical stimulation in the treatment of genuine stress incontinence: a multicenter, placebo-controlled trial.

作者信息

Sand P K, Richardson D A, Staskin D R, Swift S E, Appell R A, Whitmore K E, Ostergard D R

机构信息

Evanston Continence Center, Evanston Hospital, Northwestern University, IL 60201, USA.

出版信息

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Jul;173(1):72-9. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90172-8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to determine the efficacy of transvaginal electrical stimulation in treating genuine stress incontinence.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 15-week trial comparing the use of an active pelvic floor stimulator with a sham device. Thirty-five women used an active unit and 17 control subjects used sham devices. Weekly and daily voiding diaries were recorded throughout the trial. Urodynamic testing, including pad test and subtracted cystometry, was done before and at the end of device use. Pelvic muscle strength was measured at baseline and at the end of the trial. Patients scored their symptoms on visual analog scales and completed quality-of-life questionnaires before and after therapy.

RESULTS

Significant improvements from baseline were found in patients using active devices but not in controls. Comparisons of changes from baseline between active-device and control patients showed that active-device patients had significantly greater improvement in weekly (p = 0.009) and daily (p = 0.04) leakage episodes, pad testing (p = 0.005), and vaginal muscle strength (p = 0.02) when compared with control subjects. Significantly greater improvement was also found for both visual analog scores of urinary incontinence (p = 0.007) and stress incontinence (p = 0.02), as well as for subjective reporting of frequency of urine loss (p = 0.002), and urine loss with sneezing, coughing, or laughing (p = 0.02), when compared with controls. Pad testing showed that stress incontinence was improved by at least 50% in 62% of patients using an active device compared with only 19% of patients using sham devices (p = 0.01). Voiding diaries showed at least 50% improvement in 48% of active-device patients compared with 13% of women using the sham device (p = 0.02). No irreversible adverse effects were noted in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Transvaginal pelvic floor electrical stimulation was found to be a safe and effective therapy for genuine stress incontinence.

摘要

目的

我们的目的是确定经阴道电刺激治疗真性压力性尿失禁的疗效。

研究设计

这是一项多中心、前瞻性、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照的15周试验,比较使用活性盆底刺激器与假装置的效果。35名女性使用活性装置,17名对照受试者使用假装置。在整个试验过程中记录每周和每日的排尿日记。在使用装置前和使用结束时进行尿动力学测试,包括护垫试验和减法膀胱测压。在基线和试验结束时测量盆底肌肉力量。患者在视觉模拟量表上对症状进行评分,并在治疗前后完成生活质量问卷。

结果

使用活性装置的患者与基线相比有显著改善,而对照组则无。活性装置患者与对照患者基线变化的比较显示,与对照受试者相比,活性装置患者在每周(p = 0.009)和每日(p = 0.04)漏尿次数、护垫试验(p = 0.005)和阴道肌肉力量(p = 0.02)方面有显著更大的改善。与对照组相比,在尿失禁(p = 0.007)和压力性尿失禁(p = 0.02)的视觉模拟评分以及主观报告的漏尿频率(p = 0.002)和打喷嚏、咳嗽或大笑时的漏尿(p = 0.02)方面也发现有显著更大的改善。护垫试验显示,使用活性装置的患者中有62%的压力性尿失禁改善至少50%,而使用假装置的患者中只有19%(p = 0.01)。排尿日记显示,48%的活性装置患者改善至少50%,而使用假装置的女性中为13%(p = 0.02)。两组均未发现不可逆的不良反应。

结论

经阴道盆底电刺激被发现是治疗真性压力性尿失禁的一种安全有效的疗法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验