Mark H Ebell1, Taylor Radke2, Jack Gardner2. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia. Electronic address: ebell@uga.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We systematically reviewed desmopressin as treatment for nocturia in generally healthy adults with a focus on benefits and harms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After a literature search we identified 10 articles (2,191 patients) that met our inclusion criteria of parallel group design, randomized, controlled trials with information on at least 1 benefit or harm of desmopressin in patients with nocturia. We evaluated the quality of included trials based on The Cochrane Collaboration criteria, assessed heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic and performed random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Studies were generally of high quality, although 4 used an active run-in period to titrate the dose and exclude patients with adverse effects or who were nonresponders. Thus, they were at high risk for bias. Desmopressin doses of at least 25 mcg or greater decreased nocturnal voids and increased time to first void. A dose of 100 mcg provided just more than an hour of additional sleep before the first void compared with placebo as well as 0.72 fewer voids per night. Higher doses provided no significant increase in benefit. Hyponatremia (RR 5.1) and headache (RR 4.3) were the most common adverse effects. Serious adverse effects were rare. CONCLUSIONS: Desmopressin appears to offer a modest benefit for treating nocturia in generally healthy adults with adequate safety. The initial dose should be between 50 and 100 mcg. Higher doses should only be used with caution and a lower initial dose of 25 to 50 mcg is appropriate in elderly patients. All patients should be monitored for hyponatremia. The drug should be used with caution in patients with chronic lung disease due to the rare occurrence of respiratory failure. Additional well designed, adequately powered studies 1 or more years in duration are needed.
PURPOSE: We systematically reviewed desmopressin as treatment for nocturia in generally healthy adults with a focus on benefits and harms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After a literature search we identified 10 articles (2,191 patients) that met our inclusion criteria of parallel group design, randomized, controlled trials with information on at least 1 benefit or harm of desmopressin in patients with nocturia. We evaluated the quality of included trials based on The Cochrane Collaboration criteria, assessed heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic and performed random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Studies were generally of high quality, although 4 used an active run-in period to titrate the dose and exclude patients with adverse effects or who were nonresponders. Thus, they were at high risk for bias. Desmopressin doses of at least 25 mcg or greater decreased nocturnal voids and increased time to first void. A dose of 100 mcg provided just more than an hour of additional sleep before the first void compared with placebo as well as 0.72 fewer voids per night. Higher doses provided no significant increase in benefit. Hyponatremia (RR 5.1) and headache (RR 4.3) were the most common adverse effects. Serious adverse effects were rare. CONCLUSIONS: Desmopressin appears to offer a modest benefit for treating nocturia in generally healthy adults with adequate safety. The initial dose should be between 50 and 100 mcg. Higher doses should only be used with caution and a lower initial dose of 25 to 50 mcg is appropriate in elderly patients. All patients should be monitored for hyponatremia. The drug should be used with caution in patients with chronic lung disease due to the rare occurrence of respiratory failure. Additional well designed, adequately powered studies 1 or more years in duration are needed.
Authors: Benoit Peyronnet; Lauren B Krupp; W Stuart Reynolds; Xavier Gamé; Gérard Amarenco; Jean-Nicolas Cornu; Lana Zhovtis Ryerson; Carrie Lyn Sammarco; Jonathan E Howard; Robert W Charlson; Roger R Dmochowski; Benjamin M Brucker Journal: Rev Urol Date: 2019
Authors: Catalin Pricop; Dumitru D Branisteanu; Martha Orsolya; Dragos Puia; Anca Matei; Ionel Alexandru Checherita Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 2.370
Authors: Kristian Vinter Juul; Niels Jessen; Donald L Bliwise; Egbert van der Meulen; Jens Peter Nørgaard Journal: Endocrine Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 3.633