OBJECTIVES: To perform a randomized comparative study investigating the urodynamic effects of functional magnetic stimulation (FMS) and functional electrical stimulation (FES) on the inhibition of detrusor overactivity. METHODS:Thirty-two patients with urinary incontinence due to detrusor overactivity (15 men, 17 women; age 62. 3 +/- 16.6 years) were randomly assigned to two treatment groups (15 patients in the FMS group and 17 in the FES group). Stimulation was applied continuously at 10 Hz in both groups. For FMS, the magnetic stimulator unit was set on an armchair type seat and had a concave-shaped coil, so that the patients could sit during stimulation. For FES, a vaginal electrode was used in the women and a surface electrode on the dorsal part of the penis was used in the men. Cystometry was performed before and during the stimulation. RESULTS: The bladder capacity at the first desire to void and the maximum cystometric capacity increased significantly during stimulation compared with prestimulation levels in both groups (P = 0.0054 and 0.0026, respectively, in the FMS group and P = 0.0015 and 0.0229, respectively, in the FES group). However, the increase in the maximum cystometric capacity was significantly (P = 0.0135) greater in the FMS group (114.2 +/- 124.1 mL or an increase of 105. 5% +/- 130.4% compared with the pretreatment level) than that in the FES group (32.3 +/- 56.6 mL or an increase of 16.3% +/- 33.9%). Detrusor overactivity was abolished in 3 patients in the FMS group but not in any patient in the FES group. CONCLUSIONS: Although both treatments were effective, the inhibition of detrusor overactivity appeared greater in the FMS group than in the FES group.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To perform a randomized comparative study investigating the urodynamic effects of functional magnetic stimulation (FMS) and functional electrical stimulation (FES) on the inhibition of detrusor overactivity. METHODS: Thirty-two patients with urinary incontinence due to detrusor overactivity (15 men, 17 women; age 62. 3 +/- 16.6 years) were randomly assigned to two treatment groups (15 patients in the FMS group and 17 in the FES group). Stimulation was applied continuously at 10 Hz in both groups. For FMS, the magnetic stimulator unit was set on an armchair type seat and had a concave-shaped coil, so that the patients could sit during stimulation. For FES, a vaginal electrode was used in the women and a surface electrode on the dorsal part of the penis was used in the men. Cystometry was performed before and during the stimulation. RESULTS: The bladder capacity at the first desire to void and the maximum cystometric capacity increased significantly during stimulation compared with prestimulation levels in both groups (P = 0.0054 and 0.0026, respectively, in the FMS group and P = 0.0015 and 0.0229, respectively, in the FES group). However, the increase in the maximum cystometric capacity was significantly (P = 0.0135) greater in the FMS group (114.2 +/- 124.1 mL or an increase of 105. 5% +/- 130.4% compared with the pretreatment level) than that in the FES group (32.3 +/- 56.6 mL or an increase of 16.3% +/- 33.9%). Detrusor overactivity was abolished in 3 patients in the FMS group but not in any patient in the FES group. CONCLUSIONS: Although both treatments were effective, the inhibition of detrusor overactivity appeared greater in the FMS group than in the FES group.
Authors: Kari Bo; Helena C Frawley; Bernard T Haylen; Yoram Abramov; Fernando G Almeida; Bary Berghmans; Maria Bortolini; Chantale Dumoulin; Mario Gomes; Doreen McClurg; Jane Meijlink; Elizabeth Shelly; Emanuel Trabuco; Carolina Walker; Amanda Wells Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-12-05 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: J N Nyarangi-Dix; D Schultz-Lampel; U Hohenfellner; J Huber; G Hatiboglu; N Djakovic; A Haferkamp; M Hohenfellner Journal: Urologe A Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Fiona Stewart; Luis F Gameiro; Regina El Dib; Monica O Gameiro; Anil Kapoor; Joao L Amaro Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-12-09
Authors: Eman M Khedr; Khaled A Elbeh; Ahmed Abdel Baky; Noha Abo-Elfetoh; Dina H El-Hammady; Fatma Korashy Journal: Restor Neurol Neurosci Date: 2015 Impact factor: 2.406
Authors: Hayk Petrosyan; Li Liang; Asrat Tesfa; Sue A Sisto; Magda Fahmy; Victor L Arvanian Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2020-07-12 Impact factor: 3.698