PURPOSE: Parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and posterior tibial nerve stimulation have emerged as effective methods to treat overactive bladder in children. However, to our knowledge no study has compared the 2 methods. We evaluated the results of parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and posterior tibial nerve stimulation in children with overactive bladder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively studied children with overactive bladder without dysfunctional voiding. Success of treatment was evaluated by visual analogue scale and dysfunctional voiding symptom score, and by level of improvement of each specific symptom. Parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation was performed 3 times weekly and posterior tibial nerve stimulation was performed once weekly. RESULTS: A total of 22 consecutive patients were treated with posterior tibial nerve stimulation and 37 with parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. There was no difference between the 2 groups regarding demographic characteristics or types of symptoms. Concerning the evaluation by visual analogue scale, complete resolution of symptoms was seen in 70% of the group undergoing parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and in 9% of the group undergoing posterior tibial nerve stimulation (p = 0.02). When the groups were compared, there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.55). The frequency of persistence of urgency and diurnal urinary incontinence was nearly double in the group undergoing posterior tibial nerve stimulation. However, this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We found that parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is more effective in resolving overactive bladder symptoms, which matches parental perception. However, there were no statistically significant differences in the evaluation by dysfunctional voiding symptom score, or in complete resolution of urgency or diurnal incontinence.
PURPOSE: Parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and posterior tibial nerve stimulation have emerged as effective methods to treat overactive bladder in children. However, to our knowledge no study has compared the 2 methods. We evaluated the results of parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and posterior tibial nerve stimulation in children with overactive bladder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively studied children with overactive bladder without dysfunctional voiding. Success of treatment was evaluated by visual analogue scale and dysfunctional voiding symptom score, and by level of improvement of each specific symptom. Parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation was performed 3 times weekly and posterior tibial nerve stimulation was performed once weekly. RESULTS: A total of 22 consecutive patients were treated with posterior tibial nerve stimulation and 37 with parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. There was no difference between the 2 groups regarding demographic characteristics or types of symptoms. Concerning the evaluation by visual analogue scale, complete resolution of symptoms was seen in 70% of the group undergoing parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and in 9% of the group undergoing posterior tibial nerve stimulation (p = 0.02). When the groups were compared, there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.55). The frequency of persistence of urgency and diurnal urinary incontinence was nearly double in the group undergoing posterior tibial nerve stimulation. However, this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We found that parasacral transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation is more effective in resolving overactive bladder symptoms, which matches parental perception. However, there were no statistically significant differences in the evaluation by dysfunctional voiding symptom score, or in complete resolution of urgency or diurnal incontinence.