PURPOSE: We examined data from multiple institutions to determine whether intravesical bladder stimulation therapy is effective in improving bladder compliance by increasing bladder capacity and lowering bladder storage pressures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The charts of 568 patients from 11 institutions were evaluated. Of the 568 patients 335 had adequate and accurate pretreatment and posttreatment urodynamic studies, and were included in this study. A total of 155 patients was from Children's Memorial Hospital, while the remaining 180 were from 10 other institutions. Bladder capacity and bladder capacity pressure were determined for each patient before and after therapy. RESULTS: Overall, 53% of patients had increased bladder capacity of 20% or greater after treatment (average increase 105 cc), which represents a 63% increase from pretreatment values. This increase occurred in an average of 1.9 years. Further analysis of this subset of patients revealed that in 90% intravesical storage pressures were decreased or maintained within a safe range (less than 40 cm. water). Evaluation of patients who did not respond to bladder stimulation with a 20% or greater increase in bladder capacity revealed that they had nearly normal bladder capacity before therapy. When the data on bladder capacity and bladder capacity pressure from Children's Memorial Hospital were compared to results from the 10 other institutions, there were no appreciable differences. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder stimulation is effective in increasing bladder capacity without significantly elevating storage pressure in a majority of patients. We conclude that this technique is safe and effective in improving bladder compliance, and that it is reproducible elsewhere.
PURPOSE: We examined data from multiple institutions to determine whether intravesical bladder stimulation therapy is effective in improving bladder compliance by increasing bladder capacity and lowering bladder storage pressures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The charts of 568 patients from 11 institutions were evaluated. Of the 568 patients 335 had adequate and accurate pretreatment and posttreatment urodynamic studies, and were included in this study. A total of 155 patients was from Children's Memorial Hospital, while the remaining 180 were from 10 other institutions. Bladder capacity and bladder capacity pressure were determined for each patient before and after therapy. RESULTS: Overall, 53% of patients had increased bladder capacity of 20% or greater after treatment (average increase 105 cc), which represents a 63% increase from pretreatment values. This increase occurred in an average of 1.9 years. Further analysis of this subset of patients revealed that in 90% intravesical storage pressures were decreased or maintained within a safe range (less than 40 cm. water). Evaluation of patients who did not respond to bladder stimulation with a 20% or greater increase in bladder capacity revealed that they had nearly normal bladder capacity before therapy. When the data on bladder capacity and bladder capacity pressure from Children's Memorial Hospital were compared to results from the 10 other institutions, there were no appreciable differences. CONCLUSIONS: Bladder stimulation is effective in increasing bladder capacity without significantly elevating storage pressure in a majority of patients. We conclude that this technique is safe and effective in improving bladder compliance, and that it is reproducible elsewhere.