Can patient reported outcomes of intra-vesical Botulinum Toxin A injections in real-world neurogenic patients be predicted from pre-treatment urodynamics findings?

Aleksejeva K1, Scrimgeour G2, Axell R1, Yasmin H1, Thommyppillai M1, Pakzad M1, Hamid R1, Ockrim J1, Greenwell T1

Research Type

Clinical

Abstract Category

Urodynamics

Abstract 566
On Demand Urodynamics
Scientific Open Discussion Session 37
On-Demand
Detrusor Overactivity Retrospective Study Urgency/Frequency Incontinence Overactive Bladder
1. FFR Urology, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, 2. Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
Presenter
M

Maria Thommyppillai

Links

Abstract

Hypothesis / aims of study
Intra-vesical injections of Botulinum Toxin A have proven to be an effective and safe third-line therapy option in management of neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO). Previous prospective studies have suggested that pre-operative urodynamic parameters could be used to predict the response to intra-vesical Botulinum Toxin A [1]. We have reviewed the records of 140 consecutive patients with neurogenic-mediated overactive bladder symptoms (nOAB) who have been treated with intra-vesical injections of Botulinum Toxin A, and assessed whether there were any correlations between patient-reported treatment outcomes (PROMS) and pre-operative urodynamic findings.
Study design, materials and methods
We conducted a retrospective review of all 140 patients (93 women, mean age 57; 47 men, mean age 54) who have received intra-vesical Botulinum Toxin A injections at our tertiary referral centre for refractory nOAB symptoms between 1st January 2006 and 31st December 2018. To evaluate treatment outcomes we used the 5-point Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGII) score at last review (all within 6 months of this study) . The PROMS were correlated with pre-operative urodynamic findings. Statistical analysis was done by Students T-Test and Chi Square Test with significance determined at p< .05.
Results
A total of 116 patients had pre-operative urodynamic results available for review; of these 95 had urodynamically confirmed neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) and 14 demonstrated loss of compliance (LoC). Meaningful voiding studies were only obtained in 8 patients, which limited our assessment of the impact of the voiding phase parameters. The full results are listed in Table 1.
Interpretation of results
A large proportion of our patients had complex past medical history – 60% had previous abdominal surgery, 22% reported concurrent SUI symptoms, 11% had urodynamically confirmed bladder outlet obstruction and 65% were intermittent or indwelling catheter-dependent prior to receiving intra-vesical injections of Botulinum Toxin A, which increased to 88% after receiving the treatment. 
At the last follow-up, 73% of women and 81% of men reported good or partially good effect (PGII scores of 1 and 2) following Botox A injections. We noted that successful outcomes of the Botulinum toxin A injections in men were more likely with nOAB dry (p=0.032 comparing to nOAB wet). We also noted that larger voided volumes in men correlated with reduction in treatment benefit (p=0.042), however our assessment was limited by a small proportion of valid voiding studies during pre-treatment urodynamic investigations. We have not identified any correlation between pre-operative urodynamic findings and treatment outcomes in women.
Concluding message
In our real-world neurogenic patients with refractory nOAB symptoms successful outcomes of the Botulinum toxin A injections in men were more likely with nOAB dry (p=0.032 comparing to nOAB wet). We have not identified any correlation between pre-operative urodynamic findings and treatment outcomes in women.
Figure 1 Table 1
References
  1. Álvares, R. A., Araújo, I. D., & Sanches, M. D. (2014). A pilot prospective study to evaluate whether the bladder morphology in cystography and/or urodynamic may help predict the response to botulinum toxin a injection in neurogenic bladder refractory to anticholinergics. BMC urology, 14, 66. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2490-14-66
Disclosures
Funding none Clinical Trial No Subjects Human Ethics not Req'd retrospective audit Helsinki Yes Informed Consent No
29/04/2024 04:52:42