4.5 Article

Efficacy of propiverine ER with or without α-blockers related to maximum urinary flow rate in adult men with OAB: results of a 12-week, multicenter, non-interventional study

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
卷 29, 期 2, 页码 217-223

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-011-0654-7

关键词

Lower urinary tract symptoms; Overactive bladder syndrome; Cholinergic antagonists; Adrenergic alpha-antagonists; Urinary retention; Propiverine hydrochloride

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Comparison of efficacy of propiverine extended release (ER) 30 mg o.d. in the treatment of male OAB administered as monotherapy (MT) or add-on to alpha-blockers (combination treatment, CT) in relation to maximum urinary flow (Q(max)) in a non-interventional study. Men a parts per thousand yen40 years with OAB symptoms, Q(max) a parts per thousand yen10 ml/s, prostate volume < 40 ml, post-void residuals (PVR) < 100 ml, and IPSS < 20 were included. OAB symptoms, IPSS, and PVR were recorded before and after 12 weeks of treatment. Participants were stratified by Q(max) (group A a parts per thousand yen15 ml/s, group B < 15 ml/s) and CT vs. MT. Safety parameters were monitored. A total of 2,219 men participated and were involved in safety analysis; 1,849 men (mean age 66 years) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were involved in efficacy analysis. In group A, 291 men received MT and 479 CT; in group B, 184 men received MT and 895 CT. OAB symptoms improved significantly in all groups throughout the study without differences between MT and CT. IPSS improvement in group B was less with MT than with CT (-3.9 vs. -5.2; P < 0.001), whereas IPSS improvement was similar in group A (-4.6 vs. -5.1). Mean PVR change was not clinically relevant, but two men (0.1%) experienced urinary retention. Under real-life conditions, treatment of OAB symptoms with propiverine ER is equally effective in men with MT or CT regardless of baseline Q(max). In men with reduced Q(max), IPSS improvement is significantly smaller with MT. The incidence of urinary retention during propiverine ER treatment is low.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据