MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1002/nau.23893

Медицинская библиотека · Neurourology and urodynamics · 2018

Which anticholinergic is best for people with overactive bladders? A network meta-analysis.

Herbison Peter, McKenzie Joanne E

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАNetwork Meta-AnalysisПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

AIM: To carry out a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of anticholinergic drug treatment for people with overactive bladders.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches for relevant RCTs were carried out starting with RCTs included in previous systematic reviews with the last search in February 2017. Searches included terms for the anticholinergic drugs tolterodine, oxybutynin, trospium, propiverine, solifenacin, darifenacin, imidafenacin, and fesoterodine. Data was extracted from the systematic reviews or reports of studies for cure or improvement, voids per 24 hr, leakage episodes per 24 hr and dry mouth. Data was analysed using frequentist network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

128 studies were found. There was no clearly best treatment for cure or improvement. The differences between treatments for voids and leakages were small and unlikely to be of clinical importance. Transdermally delivered oxybutynin was clearly the best treatment for dry mouth but was still worse than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

All the anticholinergic drugs were better than placebo but apart from dry mouth were similar in effect. Transdermal oxybutynin caused less dry mouth than the other treatments, so may be worth considering as the first treatment.

Для цитирования: Herbison Peter, McKenzie Joanne E. Which anticholinergic is best for people with overactive bladders? A network meta-analysis.. Neurourology and urodynamics. 2018. DOI: 10.1002/nau.23893.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.