Peroneal electric transcutaneous neuromodulation versus solifenacin in the treatment of the overactive bladder wet

dc.contributor.authorKrhut, Jan
dc.contributor.authorRejchrt, Michal
dc.contributor.authorSlovák, Martin
dc.contributor.authorPeter, Lukáš
dc.contributor.authorZvara, Peter
dc.date.accessioned2026-06-24T11:06:41Z
dc.date.available2026-06-24T11:06:41Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.description.abstractIntroduction Peroneal electrical Transcutaneous NeuroModulation (peroneal eTNM (R)) is a non-invasive treatment for overactive bladder (OAB). In the previous randomized study in female patients with OAB, both dry and wet, peroneal eTNM (R) demonstrated significantly better safety and comparable efficacy to solifenacin. This subgroup analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of peroneal eTNM (R) versus solifenacin in OAB wet population. Material and methods In the primary study, eligible subjects were randomized in a 2 : 1 ratio to receive either 12 weeks of daily peroneal eTNM (R) for 30 minutes or solifenacin 5 mg daily. This subgroup analysis included participants who presented with at least one incontinence episode at baseline and completed the study according to protocol. The primary endpoint was safety, secondary endpoint was proportion of continent subjects after treatment. Additional efficacy assessments included change in bladder diary variables, OAB V8 score, and quality of life (QoL). Results In the peroneal eTNM (R) group (n = 26), three treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were recorded, while nine TRAEs occured in the solifenacin group (n = 16). The proportion of patients who achieved continence after 4, 8 and 12 weeks of treatment was 50%, 62%, and 65% in the peroneal eTNM (R) and 56%, 50%, and 56% in the solifenacin group, respectively. Both treatments led to significant and similar improvements in all bladder diary variables, OAB V8 score, and QoL. Conclusions The results of this secondary analysis confirm that peroneal eTNM (R) has significantly better safety profile and comparable efficacy versus solifenacin in the subgroup of incontinent OAB patients.
dc.description.firstpage323
dc.description.issue3
dc.description.lastpage330
dc.description.sourceWeb of Science
dc.description.volume78
dc.identifier.citationCentral European Journal of Urology. 2025, vol. 78, issue 3, p. 323-330.
dc.identifier.doi10.5173/ceju.2024.0261
dc.identifier.issn2080-4806
dc.identifier.issn2080-4873
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10084/158790
dc.identifier.wos001659076600009
dc.language.isoen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCentral European Journal of Urology
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2024.0261
dc.rights© Polish Urological Association
dc.rights.accessopenAccess
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
dc.subjectneuromodulation
dc.subjecttranscutaneous electric nerve stimulation
dc.subjecturinary bladder
dc.subjectoveractive
dc.subjectperoneal nerve
dc.subjectsolifenacin succinate
dc.subjectlower urinary tract symptoms
dc.titlePeroneal electric transcutaneous neuromodulation versus solifenacin in the treatment of the overactive bladder wet
dc.typearticle
dc.type.statusPeer-reviewed
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
local.files.count1
local.files.size1366580
local.has.filesyes

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 out of 1 results
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2080-4806-2025v78i3p323.pdf
Size:
1.3 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 out of 1 results
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
718 B
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: