4.3 Article

Bladder and bowel dysfunction affect quality of life. A cross sectional study of 60 patients with aquaporin-4 antibody positive Neuromyelitis Optica spectrum disorder

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS AND RELATED DISORDERS
Volume 4, Issue 6, Pages 614-618

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2015.07.015

Keywords

Bladder; Bowel; Quality of life; Myelitis; Neuromyelitis Optica

Funding

  1. highly specialised commissioning group of NHS England
  2. United Kingdom's Department of Health NIHR Biomedical Research Centres funding scheme

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Transverse myelitis (TM) associated with Neuromyelitis Optica (NMO) can be severe and is well known to reduce mobility early in the disease. However the burden of bladder and bowel dysfunction is unknown and overlooked. We studied the frequency of bladder and bowel dysfunction and their impact on quality of life. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 60 patients who had AQP4-IgG positive NMO associated TM was performed using the Bladder Control Scale, Lower Urinary Tract Quality of Life, Bowel Control Scale and Neurogenic Bowel Score, Short-Form-36 Health Survey and EDSS. The relationships between the variables were analysed with multiple linear regression. Results: Fifty women and 10 men participated. 78% (47/60) patients reported bladder symptoms and a similar number reported bowel problems. 87% (52/60) patients reported either bladder or bowel dysfunction. 65% (39/60) developed residual symptoms after the first episode of myelitis and the remaining by the second episode. Both bladder and bowel dysfunction reduced quality of life and required modification of lifestyle in 83% (39/47) and 70% (33/47) respectively. Conclusion: Bladder and bowel dysfunction is very common in NMO associated myelitis developing early in the disease and significantly affects quality of life. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available