4.0 Article

Long-term outcomes of intradetrusor botulinum toxin A in multiple sclerosis patients

Journal

PROGRES EN UROLOGIE
Volume 29, Issue 3, Pages 156-165

Publisher

ELSEVIER MASSON, CORP OFF
DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2019.02.003

Keywords

Neurogenic bladder; Multiples sclerosis; Botulinium toxin A; Urinary incontinence; Refractory neurogenic detrusor overactivity; Urinary infection

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction. - The objective of this study was to analyze the long-term efficiency and tolerance of TB in the management of anticholinergic refractory hyperactive bladder in patients with MS. Material and method. - Retrospective mono-centric cohort study of all patients with MS who had a TB injection for anticholinergic refractory hyperactivity from 2005 to 2015. The primary endpoint was clinical efficiency based on the frequency of urinary leakage and symptomatic urinary tract infections. Results. - One hundred and nineteen patients received the first injection. Median follow-up was 26.5 months. After an injection, there was a significant decrease in the number of leaks, with 69.7% of patients without leaks and 93.3% of patients without urinary tract infections. After 7 injections 44% of the patients were still dry and 62.07% had no symptomatic urinary tract infections. The failure rate was 24.37%, the average duration before discharge was 34.7 months. 19 (66%) patients stop treatment for loss of efficacy, 9 (31%) for disease progression and 1 (3%) for cessation of treatment without cause. Of the 774 injections performed, there were complications for 26 of them (3.35%). Conclusion. - Botulinum toxin remains the second-line reference treatment for detrusor over-activity of neurological origin. There is, at least in the short term, a good answer in a large number of cases. This response can be maintained for many years, especially if patients use intermittent catheterization, with excellent tolerance. (C) 2019 Elsevier Masson SAS. 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

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available