Objective: To compare the therapeutic effects of solifenacin succinate with extendedrelease tolterodine for the treatment of overactive bladder (OAB) in Bangladeshi patients. Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blind, two-arm, parallel-group, clinicaltrial was conducted in the department of Urology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib MedicalUniversity (BSMMU), Dhaka from January 2013 to June 2014. A total of 65 patientswith OAB were treated with solifenacin succinate 5 mg (experimental group, n=33)and extended release tolterodine 4 mg (control group, n=32), both at night daily for 12weeks. Efficacy and safety variables were assessed and compared with baseline and at 12weeks treatment in between the two groups. Results: At week 12, solifenacin succinate and extended release tolterodine demonstratedreduction in the mean number of micturition (50% vs. 51%), urgency (87% vs. 73%),urge incontinence (89% vs. 71%), nocturia (89% vs. 74%), usage of pads (90% vs.71%) per 24 hours. There was increased in the mean voided volume of each micturitionin both the groups without any difference in between them. The incidence of major adverseevents were dry mouth (15.2% vs. 9.4%), constipation (9.1% vs. 15.6%), and blurredvision (6.1% vs. 3.1%) respectively. Conclusions: Solifenacin succinate had greater efficacy to extended release tolterodine intreating overactive bladder. There were no significant treatment difference between the twogroups in decreasing the number of micturition and increasing the voided volume of eachmicturition and the incidence of major adverse events. All the adverse effects were mild andtransient in nature and discontinuation of medication due to adverse effects were low. Bangladesh Journal of Urology, Vol. 23, No. 1, January 2020 p.76-81
Background: Primary bladder neck obstruction is not uncommon in middle aged men. Patients with primary bladder neck obstruction usually present with voiding and storage symptoms. They are evaluated by history, physical examination, investigations and confirmed by urodynamic study. There are different modalities of treatment. It varies according to age, sex and associated conditions. If medical treatment failed, they are treated with unilateral or bilateral bladder neck incisions. Among them, per and postoperative outcome like operation time, hospital stay, voiding time, PVR, Qmax and retrograde ejaculation were assessed in both the group. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the operation time, postoperative hospital stay, PVR, Qmax, voiding time and retrograde ejaculation between two groups who underwent unilateral or bilateral bladder neck incision due to primary bladder neck obstruction. Material and methods: This quasi experimental study was carried out in the department of urology, Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, from July 2013 to June 2015. Male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to primary bladder neck obstruction were the study population. Sixty patients were selected from Urology OPD as sample according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then, they were divided into two groups purposively, designated as group I and group II for unilateral and bilateral bladder neck incision respectively to see the per and postoperative outcome like operating time, hospital stay, voiding time, PVR, Qmax and retrograde ejaculation Results: Total 60 patients were recruited in this study of which 30 patients were in group I and the rest of 30 patients were in group II. The mean age with a SD was 28.33 ± 5.33 years and 28.20±5.49 years in group I and group II respectively (p>0.05). In group I, the mean ± SD of operative time was 19.9±3.26 min within a range 15-25 min. In group II, the mean ± SD of operative time was 27.16 ±2.65 min within a range 20-30 min (p<0.05).In group I mean (SD) hospital stay was 2.10 ± 0.30 day, in group II it was 2.40 ± 0.56 day Bangladesh J. Urol. 2021; 24(1): 46-52
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.