Dataset Information

Urinary tract infection and drug-resistant urinary tract infection after intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injection versus sacral neuromodulation.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction and hypothesis

Intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA (BTX) and sacral neuromodulation (SNM) are effective treatments for refractory urgency urinary incontinence/overactive bladder (UUI/OAB). BTX carries a risk of urinary tract infection (UTI), which is concerning for the development of multidrug resistant (MDR) UTI. We hypothesized that BTX might carry a higher risk of UTI and MDR UTI compared with SNM and that UTI and MDR UTI risk might increase after repeat BTX injection.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included women undergoing BTX or SNM for refractory UUI/OAB in 2012-2016. UTI and MDR UTI were assessed up to 1 year post-treatment or until repeat treatment and compared between initial BTX and SNM and between repeat BTX injections. Univariate analyses included Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests and generalized linear models (GLM) with logit link function. Multivariate analyses used GLM to assess the best predictor variables for any UTI.

Results

One hundred and one patients were included (28 BTX, 73 SNM). Rates of UTI (39.3% [95% CI 21.5, 59.4] BTX vs 37.0% [95% CI 26.0, 49.1] SNM) were similar in the two groups at all time intervals. One MDR UTI occurred after SNM. Risk of UTI did not increase with repeat BTX (11 out of 28 [39.3%], 6 out of 17 [35.3%], and 4 out of 7 [57.1%] after 1, 2, and ≥ 3 treatments respectively; p = 0.62). Multivariate analysis found that history of recurrent UTI (OR 2.5, 95%CI 0.98-6.39) and prolapse repair (OR 4.6, 95%CI 1.23-17.07) had increased odds of UTI.

Conclusions

Rates of UTI were similar in patients undergoing BTX and SNM. MDR UTI was rare. Patients with prior prolapse repair or recurrent UTI may be at a higher risk of UTI after either procedure.

SUBMITTER: Elmer-Lyon CG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6980323 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:We measured urinary biomarker levels in women with refractory urgency urinary incontinence and controls at baseline and 6 months after treatment with sacral neuromodulation or intradetrusor injection of onabotulinumtoxinA. We also assessed the association of baseline biomarkers with posttreatment urgency urinary incontinence episodes and overactive bladder symptom bother outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS:First morning urine samples were collected from consented trial participants and age matched women without urgency urinary incontinence. Biomarkers reflecting general inflammation, neuroinflammation, afferent neurotransmitters and tissue remodeling were measured using standardized enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and activity assays as appropriate. Symptom bother was assessed by the overactive bladder questionnaire and urgency urinary incontinence episodes were determined by bladder diary. Linear models were used to examine differences in mean biomarker levels and the change in urgency urinary incontinence episodes and symptom bother between baseline and 6 months. Modest evidence of a potential association was represented by p ?0.01 and p ?0.004 represented moderate evidence of an association with outcomes. RESULTS:Baseline biomarker levels differed little between cases and controls except tropoelastin (p = 0.001) and N-terminal telopeptide collagen type 1 (p <0.001). Changes in biomarker levels 6 months after intervention included decreases in collagenase (p <0.001) in both treatment groups and increases in interleukin-8 (p = 0.002) and matrix metalloprotease-9 (p <0.001) in the onabotulinumtoxinA group. Higher baseline calcitonin gene-related peptide across both treatments (p = 0.007) and nerve growth factor in the onabotulinumtoxinA arm (p = 0.007) were associated with less reduction in overactive bladder symptom bother. CONCLUSIONS:Refractory urgency urinary incontinence is a complex condition. These data suggest that matrix remodeling and neuropeptide mediation may be involved in its pathophysiological mechanisms and response to treatment.

Project description: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.

Project description:PURPOSE:Sacral neuromodulation and intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injection are therapies for refractory urgency urinary incontinence. Sacral neuromodulation involves surgical implantation of a device that can last 4 to 6 years while onabotulinumtoxinA therapy involves serial office injections. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of 2-stage implantation sacral neuromodulation vs 200 units onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of urgency urinary incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Prospective economic evaluation was performed concurrent with the ROSETTA (Refractory Overactive Bladder: Sacral NEuromodulation vs. BoTulinum Toxin Assessment) randomized trial of 386 women with 6 or more urgency urinary incontinence episodes on a 3-day diary. Analysis is from the health care system perspective with primary within-trial analysis for 2 years and secondary 5-year decision analysis. Costs are in 2018 U.S. dollars. Effectiveness was measured in quality adjusted life-years (QALYs) and reductions in urgency urinary incontinence episodes per day. We generated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS:Two-year costs were higher for sacral neuromodulation than for onabotulinumtoxinA ($35,680 [95% CI 33,920-37,440] vs $7,460 [95% CI 5,780-9,150], p <0.01), persisting through 5 years ($36,550 [95% CI 34,787-38,309] vs $12,020 [95% CI 10,330-13,700], p <0.01). At 2 years there were no differences in mean reduction in urgency urinary incontinence episodes per day (-3.00 [95% CI -3.38 - -2.62] vs -3.12 [95% CI -3.48 - -2.76], p=0.66) or QALYs (1.39 [95% CI 1.34-1.44] vs 1.41 [95% CI 1.36-1.45], p=0.60). The probability that sacral neuromodulation is cost-effective relative to onabotulinumtoxinA is less than 0.025 for all willingness to pay values below $580,000 per QALY at 2 years and $204,000 per QALY at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS:Although both treatments were effective, the high cost of sacral neuromodulation is not good value for treating urgency urinary incontinence compared to 200 units onabotulinumtoxinA.

Project description:ImportanceWomen with refractory urgency urinary incontinence are treated with sacral neuromodulation and onabotulinumtoxinA with limited comparative information.ObjectiveTo assess whether onabotulinumtoxinA is superior to sacral neuromodulation in controlling refractory episodes of urgency urinary incontinence.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter open-label randomized trial (February 2012-January 2015) at 9 US medical centers involving 381 women with refractory urgency urinary incontinence.InterventionsCystoscopic intradetrusor injection of 200 U of onabotulinumtoxinA (n = 192) or sacral neuromodulation (n = 189).Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome, change from baseline mean number of daily urgency urinary incontinence episodes over 6 months, was measured with monthly 3-day diaries. Secondary outcomes included change from baseline in urinary symptom scores in the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form (SF); range, 0-100, higher scores indicating worse symptoms; Overactive Bladder Satisfaction questionnaire; range, 0-100; includes 5 subscales, higher scores indicating better satisfaction; and adverse events.ResultsOf the 364 women (mean [SD] age, 63.0 [11.6] years) in the intention-to-treat population, 190 women in the onabotulinumtoxinA group had a greater reduction in 6-month mean number of episodes of urgency incontinence per day than did the 174 in the sacral neuromodulation group (-3.9 vs -3.3 episodes per day; mean difference, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.13 to 1.14; P = .01). Participants treated with onabotulinumtoxinA showed greater improvement in the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire SF for symptom bother (-46.7 vs -38.6; mean difference, 8.1; 95% CI, 3.0 to 13.3; P = .002); treatment satisfaction (67.7 vs 59.8; mean difference, 7.8; 95% CI, 1.6 to 14.1; P = .01) and treatment endorsement (78.1 vs 67.6; mean difference; 10.4, 95% CI, 4.3 to 16.5; P < .001) than treatment with sacral neuromodulation. There were no differences in convenience (67.6 vs 70.2; mean difference, -2.5; 95% CI, -8.1 to 3.0; P = .36), adverse effects (88.4 vs 85.1; mean difference, 3.3; 95% CI, -1.9 to 8.5; P = .22), and treatment preference (92.% vs 89%; risk difference, -3%; 95% CI, -16% to 10%; P = .49). Urinary tract infections were more frequent in the onabotulinumtoxinA group (35% vs 11%; risk difference, -23%; 95% CI, -33% to -13%; P < .001). The need for self-catheterization was 8% and 2% at 1 and 6 months in the onabotulinumtoxinA group. Neuromodulation device revisions and removals occurred in 3%.Conclusions and relevanceAmong women with refractory urgency urinary incontinence, treatment with onabotulinumtoxinA compared with sacral neuromodulation resulted in a small daily improvement in episodes that although statistically significant is of uncertain clinical importance. In addition, it resulted in a higher risk of urinary tract infections and need for transient self-catheterizations.

Project description:PURPOSE:We sought to identify clinical and demographic characteristics associated with treatment response and satisfaction in women undergoing onabotulinumtoxinA and sacral neuromodulation therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS:We analyzed data from the ROSETTA (Refractory Overactive Bladder: Sacral NEuromodulation versus BoTulinum Toxin Assessment) trial. Baseline participant characteristics and clinical variables were associated with 2 definitions of treatment response, including 1) a reduction in mean daily urgency incontinence episodes during 6 months and 2) a 50% or greater decrease in urgency incontinence episodes across 6 months. The OAB-S (Overactive Bladder-Satisfaction) questionnaire was used to assess satisfaction. RESULTS:A greater reduction in mean daily urgency incontinence episodes was associated with higher HUI-3 (Health Utility Index-3) scores in the onabotulinumtoxinA group and higher baseline incontinence episodes (each p <0.001) in the 2 groups. Increased age was associated with a lesser decrease in incontinence episodes in the 2 groups (p <0.001). Increasing body mass index (adjusted OR 0.82/5 points, 95% CI 0.70-0.96) was associated with reduced achievement of a 50% or greater decrease in incontinence episodes after each treatment. Greater age (adjusted OR 0.44/10 years, 95% CI 0.30-0.65) and a higher functional comorbidity index (adjusted OR 0.84/1 point, 95% CI 0.71-0.99) were associated with reduced achievement of a 50% or greater decrease in urgency incontinence episodes in the onabotulinumtoxinA group only (p <0.001 and 0.041, respectively). In the onabotulinumtoxinA group increased satisfaction was noted with higher HUI-3 score (p = 0.002) but there was less satisfaction with higher age (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Older women with multiple comorbidities, and decreased functional and health related quality of life had decreased treatment response and satisfaction with onabotulinumtoxinA compared to sacral neuromodulation for refractory urgency incontinence.

Project description:BackgroundIntradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injection is an effective advanced treatment for overactive bladder. While the effective dosages have been well studied, very little data exist on treatment efficacy using differing injection techniques. The objective of this study was to determine whether the efficacy of a reduced injection technique of 5 injection sites was noninferior to the standard technique of 20 injection sites of intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of overactive bladder.MethodsIn this randomized noninferiority trial, men and women seeking treatment of overactive bladder with intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA injections were randomized to receive 100 units administered via either a reduced injection technique of 5 injection sites or a standard injection technique of 20 injection sites. Subjects completed a series of standardized questionnaires at baseline and at 4-12 weeks postprocedure to determine symptom severity and treatment efficacy. The primary outcome was treatment efficacy as determined by Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form with a noninferiority margin of 15 points. Secondary outcomes were incidence of urinary tract infection and urinary retention requiring catheterization.ResultsData from 77 subjects were available for analysis with 39 in the control arm (20 injections) and 38 in the study arm (5 injections). There was a significant improvement in both arms from baseline to follow-up in Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire scores (p < 0.001). Overall treatment success was 68% with no statistically significant difference between arms. A significant difference between arms was found on the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire-Short Form quality of life survey favoring the control arm (confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-20.5, p = 0.04). However, there were no significant differences between arms in the remaining validated questionnaires. The study arm did not demonstrate noninferiority to the control arm. Subjects in the study arm were significantly more likely to express a willingness to undergo the procedure again (odds ratio = 3.8, 95% CI: 1.42-10.67, p = 0.004). Adverse events did not differ between arms.ConclusionsA reduced injection technique for administration of intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA demonstrates similar efficacy to the standard injection technique but did not demonstrate noninferiority. Subjects preferred the reduced injection technique over the standard technique. A reduced injection technique is a safe and effective alternative to the standard technique.

Project description:BackgroundSacral neuromodulation has become a well-established and widely accepted treatment for refractory non-neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction, but its value in patients with a neurological cause is unclear. Although there is evidence indicating that sacral neuromodulation may be effective and safe for treating neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction, the number of investigated patients is low and there is a lack of randomized controlled trials.Methods and designThis study is a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind multicenter trial including 4 sacral neuromodulation referral centers in Switzerland. Patients with refractory neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction are enrolled. After minimally invasive bilateral tined lead placement into the sacral foramina S3 and/or S4, patients undergo prolonged sacral neuromodulation testing for 3-6 weeks. In case of successful (defined as improvement of at least 50% in key bladder diary variables (i.e. number of voids and/or number of leakages, post void residual) compared to baseline values) prolonged sacral neuromodulation testing, the neuromodulator is implanted in the upper buttock. After a 2 months post-implantation phase when the neuromodulator is turned ON to optimize the effectiveness of neuromodulation using sub-sensory threshold stimulation, the patients are randomized in a 1:1 allocation in sacral neuromodulation ON or OFF. At the end of the 2 months double-blind sacral neuromodulation phase, the patients have a neuro-urological re-evaluation, unblinding takes place, and the neuromodulator is turned ON in all patients. The primary outcome measure is success of sacral neuromodulation, secondary outcome measures are adverse events, urodynamic parameters, questionnaires, and costs of sacral neuromodulation.DiscussionIt is of utmost importance to know whether the minimally invasive and completely reversible sacral neuromodulation would be a valuable treatment option for patients with refractory neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction. If this type of treatment is effective in the neurological population, it would revolutionize the management of neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction.Trial registrationTrial registration numberhttp://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Identifier: NCT02165774.