Literature DB >> 31211964

Sacral neuromodulation versus onabotulinumtoxinA for refractory urgency urinary incontinence: impact on fecal incontinence symptoms and sexual function.

Uduak U Andy1, Cindy L Amundsen2, Emily Honeycutt3, Alayne D Markland4, Gena Dunivan5, Keisha Y Dyer6, Nicole B Korbly7, Megan Bradley8, Sandip Vasavada9, Donna Mazloomdoost10, Sonia Thomas3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Women with refractory urgency urinary incontinence can be treated with onabotulinumtoxinA or sacral neuromodulation. Little data exists on the comparative effects of treatment of refractory urgency urinary incontinence on other pelvic floor complaints, such as bowel and sexual function.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the impact of these treatments on fecal incontinence and sexual symptoms.
METHODS: This was a planned supplemental analysis of a randomized trial in women with refractory urgency urinary incontinence treated with onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 190) or sacral neuromodulation (n = 174). Fecal incontinence and sexual symptoms were assessed at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months. Fecal incontinence symptoms were measured using the St Mark's (Vaizey) Fecal Incontinence severity scale. Sexual symptoms were measured using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-12 (PISQ-12) and the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, IUGA-Revised (PISQ-IR). The PISQ-IR allows measurement of sexual symptoms in both sexually active and non-sexually active adults. Primary outcomes were change in Vaizey and PISQ-12 scores between baseline and 6 months. Secondary outcomes were change in PISQ-IR total and subscores between baseline and 6 months and change in Vaizey, PISQ-12, and PISQ-IR scores between baseline and 12 and 24 months. Intent-to-treat analysis was performed using repeated measures mixed model to estimate change in all parameters from baseline while adjusting for the baseline score. A subgroup analysis of women with clinically significant bowel symptoms was conducted based on baseline Vaizey score of ≥12.
RESULTS: At baseline, mean Vaizey scores were indicative of mild fecal incontinence symptoms and were not different between onabotulinumtoxinA and sacral neuromodulation groups (7.6 ± 5.3 vs 6.6 ± 4.9, P = .07). The proportion of sexually active women (56% vs 63%, P = .25), mean PISQ-12 score (33.4 ± 7.5 vs 32.7 ± 6.7, P = .55), or PISQ-IR subscores were also not different between the onabotulinumtoxinA and sacral neuromodulation groups at baseline. There was no difference between women treated with onabotulinumtoxinA and those treated with sacral neuromodulation at 6 months in terms of improvement in fecal incontinence symptom score (Vaizey: -1.9, 95% confidence interval -2.6 to -1.2 vs -0.9, 95% confidence interval -1.7 to -0.2, P = .07) or sexual symptoms score (PISQ-12: 2.2, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 3.7 vs 2.2, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 3.7, P = .99). There was no difference in improvement between groups in the sexual symptom subscores in sexually active and non-sexually active women at 6 months. Similar findings were noted at 12 and 24 months. In a subgroup (onabotulinumtoxinA = 33 and sacral neuromodulation = 22) with clinically significant fecal incontinence at baseline (Vaizey score ≥12), there was a clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms in both groups from baseline to 6 months, with no difference in improvement between the onabotulinumtoxinA and sacral neuromodulation groups (-5.1, 95% confidence interval -7.3 to -2.8 vs -5.6, 95% confidence interval -8.5 to -2.6, P = .8).
CONCLUSION: There were no differences in improvement of fecal incontinence and sexual symptoms in women with urgency urinary incontinence treated with onabotulinumtoxinA or sacral neuromodulation. Women with significant fecal incontinence symptoms at baseline had clinically important improvement in symptoms, with no difference between the treatments. Our findings can help clinicians counseling women considering treatment for refractory urgency urinary incontinence.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  botox; fecal incontinence; neuromodulation; sexual function; urinary incontinence; women

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31211964      PMCID: PMC6911169          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.06.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  23 in total

1.  Selecting an outcome measure for evaluating treatment in fecal incontinence.

Authors:  Marije Deutekom; Maaike P Terra; Annette C Dobben; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; Richelle J F Felt-Bersma; Jaap Stoker; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.585

2.  Prospective comparison of faecal incontinence grading systems.

Authors:  C J Vaizey; E Carapeti; J A Cahill; M A Kamm
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 23.059

3.  The effect of sacral neuromodulation on pudendal nerve function and female sexual function.

Authors:  Brent A Parnell; James F Howard; Elizabeth J Geller
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 2.696

4.  OnabotulinumtoxinA vs Sacral Neuromodulation on Refractory Urgency Urinary Incontinence in Women: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Cindy L Amundsen; Holly E Richter; Shawn A Menefee; Yuko M Komesu; Lily A Arya; W Thomas Gregory; Deborah L Myers; Halina M Zyczynski; Sandip Vasavada; Tracy L Nolen; Dennis Wallace; Susan F Meikle
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  The Refractory Overactive Bladder: Sacral NEuromodulation vs. BoTulinum Toxin Assessment: ROSETTA trial.

Authors:  Cindy L Amundsen; Holly E Richter; Shawn Menefee; Sandip Vasavada; David D Rahn; Kim Kenton; Heidi S Harvie; Dennis Wallace; Susie Meikle
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  Satisfaction and patient experience with sacral neuromodulation: results of a single center sample survey.

Authors:  Randall K Leong; Tom A Marcelissen; Fred H Nieman; Rob A De Bie; Philip E Van Kerrebroeck; Stefan G De Wachter
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-12-18       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Two-Year Outcomes of Sacral Neuromodulation Versus OnabotulinumtoxinA for Refractory Urgency Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Cindy L Amundsen; Yuko M Komesu; Christopher Chermansky; W Thomas Gregory; Deborah L Myers; Emily F Honeycutt; Sandip P Vasavada; John N Nguyen; Tracey S Wilson; Heidi S Harvie; Dennis Wallace
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2018-02-24       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  A new measure of sexual function in women with pelvic floor disorders (PFD): the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire, IUGA-Revised (PISQ-IR).

Authors:  R G Rogers; T H Rockwood; M L Constantine; R Thakar; D N Kammerer-Doak; R N Pauls; M Parekh; B Ridgeway; S Jha; J Pitkin; F Reid; S E Sutherland; E S Lukacz; C Domoney; P Sand; G W Davila; M E Espuna Pons
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  Bowel function, sexual function, and symptoms of pelvic organ prolapse in women with and without urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Anne P Cameron; Abigail R Smith; H Henry Lai; Catherine S Bradley; Alice B Liu; Robert M Merion; Brenda W Gillespie; Cindy L Amundsen; David Cella; James W Griffith; Jonathan B Wiseman; Karl J Kreder; Kimberly S Kenton; Margaret E Helmuth; Matthew O Fraser; J Quentin Clemens; Ziya Kirkali; John W Kusek; Nazema Y Siddiqui
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2018-04-10       Impact factor: 2.696

10.  A short form of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12).

Authors:  Rebecca G Rogers; Kimberly W Coates; Dorothy Kammerer-Doak; Satkirin Khalsa; Clifford Qualls
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2003-07-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.