Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 4:45 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-02-21 @ 9:24 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT05416450
Status:
UNKNOWN
Last Update Posted:
2022-11-01
First Post:
2022-06-08
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
The Efficacy of Intravaginal Electrical Stimulation in Women With Idiopathic Overactive Bladder
Sponsor:
Pamukkale University
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Comparison of the Efficacy of Intravaginal Electrical Stimulation in Antimuscarinic Naive and Refractory Women With Idiopathic Overactive Bladder
Status:
UNKNOWN
Status Verified Date:
2022-10
Last Known Status:
RECRUITING
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
In this study, it was aimed to compare the effectiveness of intravaginal electrical stimulation (IVES) added to bladder training (BT) on quality of life (QoL) and clinical parameters related to overactive bladder (OAB) in antimuscarinic naive and refractory women. The results of this study would make it easier to understand the place of IVES among the treatment options in women with idiopathic OAB.
Detailed Description:
Overactive bladder (OAB) is a symptom complex defined as urgency, with or without urgency urinary incontinence (UUI), usually with frequency and nocturia in the absence of urinary tract infection. Some authors listed the treatment options in idiopathic OAB as follows; first-line - behavioral therapy (lifestyle modifications, pelvic floor muscle (PFM) training, bladder training (BT), timed voiding), second-line - pharmacologic (antimuscarinic, beta-3 agonists), and third-line - neuromodulation/chemodenervation (tibial nerve stimulation, sacral neuromodulation, intradetrusor botulinum toxin). Intravaginal electrical stimulation (IVES) is involved in pelvic floor muscle training as a first-line treatment option. On the contrary, some authors stated that "the first-line treatment of idiopathic OAB includes behavior modification and physical therapy, and neuromodulation methods are used as third-line therapy in cases refractory to first-line and second-line (pharmacological) treatment. IVES, tibial nerve stimulation, and sacral neuromodulation are included as neuromodulation options". However, it is known that many patients with idiopathic OAB receive pharmacological treatment before reaching a conservative treatment option such as IVES. In common practice, antimuscarinic agents are frequently used as an initial treatment although burdened by a low adherence, and these patients need protracted treatment with periodic controls.
Some studies included subjects were not used antimuscarinics within the last 4-12 weeks or antimuscarinic-naive patients with OAB, while some included patients with OAB who were unresponsive or intolerant to antimuscarinics. As a result, IVES appear to be effective therapies used both as first-line treatment, as well as in managing refractory patients with idiopathic OAB. There is no evidence that it is most effective in which patients (antimuscarinic naive and refractory). Would it be more effective on the first-line or the third-line? or in other words; is there a difference in response to IVES in antimuscarinic naive and refractory patients with OAB? It should be kept in mind that IVES may lead to different results in antimuscarinic naive and refractory patients with idiopathic OAB. This study is the first prospective trial that compares the efficacy of IVES in antimuscarinic naive and refractory women with idiopathic OAB. In this study, it was aimed to compare the effectiveness of IVES added to BT on quality of life (QoL) and clinical parameters related to OAB in antimuscarinic naive and refractory women. The results of this study would make it easier to understand the place of IVES among the treatment options in women with idiopathic OAB.
Some studies included subjects were not used antimuscarinics within the last 4-12 weeks or antimuscarinic-naive patients with OAB, while some included patients with OAB who were unresponsive or intolerant to antimuscarinics. As a result, IVES appear to be effective therapies used both as first-line treatment, as well as in managing refractory patients with idiopathic OAB. There is no evidence that it is most effective in which patients (antimuscarinic naive and refractory). Would it be more effective on the first-line or the third-line? or in other words; is there a difference in response to IVES in antimuscarinic naive and refractory patients with OAB? It should be kept in mind that IVES may lead to different results in antimuscarinic naive and refractory patients with idiopathic OAB. This study is the first prospective trial that compares the efficacy of IVES in antimuscarinic naive and refractory women with idiopathic OAB. In this study, it was aimed to compare the effectiveness of IVES added to BT on quality of life (QoL) and clinical parameters related to OAB in antimuscarinic naive and refractory women. The results of this study would make it easier to understand the place of IVES among the treatment options in women with idiopathic OAB.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
False
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: