Renly Lim1, Shaun Wen Huey Lee2, Ping Yee Tan2, Men Long Liong3, Kah Hay Yuen1. 1. School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Science Malaysia, USM, Penang, Malaysia. 2. School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Bandar Sunway, Selangor, Malaysia. 3. Department of Urology, Island Hospital, Georgetown, Penang, Malaysia.
Abstract
AIMS: To review whether patients with urinary incontinence (UI) treated with magnetic stimulation (MS) have a higher continence rate compared to sham. METHODS: Computerized search of electronic databases was performed using the keywords magnetic stimulation therapy and urinary incontinence. Inclusion criteria were randomized, blinded and sham-controlled. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 494 patients were included (285 patients received active MS and 209 patients received sham MS). Sample size ranged from 20 to 151 participants. Three studies were on stress UI, two studies on urgency UI, two studies on mixed UI and one study on overactive bladder. The primary outcome (cure) was not reported since only one study reported this outcome. Meta-analysis of the secondary outcome (improvement) showed patients who received active treatment were 2.3 times more likely to experience improved continence compared to sham treatment (95% confidence interval: 1.60-3.29; P < 0.001), but was subject to bias due to varying inclusion criteria, poor reporting and variable time points. There were conflicting results in the treatment effect on quality of life (QOL). Twenty out of 494 patients (5%) experienced mild side effects. The longest follow up period was six months. CONCLUSIONS: There is no firm evidence to support the benefits of using MS in the management of UI, although short-term outcomes suggests that MS improves UI symptoms in women. The applicability of MS as a treatment option for UI remains uncertain until larger, high-quality trials with longer follow-up periods using comparable and relevant outcomes are conducted.
AIMS: To review whether patients with urinary incontinence (UI) treated with magnetic stimulation (MS) have a higher continence rate compared to sham. METHODS: Computerized search of electronic databases was performed using the keywords magnetic stimulation therapy and urinary incontinence. Inclusion criteria were randomized, blinded and sham-controlled. RESULTS: Eight studies involving 494 patients were included (285 patients received active MS and 209 patients received sham MS). Sample size ranged from 20 to 151 participants. Three studies were on stress UI, two studies on urgency UI, two studies on mixed UI and one study on overactive bladder. The primary outcome (cure) was not reported since only one study reported this outcome. Meta-analysis of the secondary outcome (improvement) showed patients who received active treatment were 2.3 times more likely to experience improved continence compared to sham treatment (95% confidence interval: 1.60-3.29; P < 0.001), but was subject to bias due to varying inclusion criteria, poor reporting and variable time points. There were conflicting results in the treatment effect on quality of life (QOL). Twenty out of 494 patients (5%) experienced mild side effects. The longest follow up period was six months. CONCLUSIONS: There is no firm evidence to support the benefits of using MS in the management of UI, although short-term outcomes suggests that MS improves UI symptoms in women. The applicability of MS as a treatment option for UI remains uncertain until larger, high-quality trials with longer follow-up periods using comparable and relevant outcomes are conducted.
Authors: Renly Lim; Men Long Liong; Wing Seng Leong; Nurzalina Abdul Karim Khan; Kah Hay Yuen Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-07-25 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Renly Lim; Men Long Liong; Wing Seng Leong; Nurzalina Abdul Karim Khan; Kah Hay Yuen Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-08-08 Impact factor: 2.894