Michele Del Zingaro

PURPOSE: Urinary disturbances are common in patients with Parkinson's disease and multiple system atrophy. We investigated the effectiveness and safety of botulinum toxin type A injected into the detrusor muscle in patients with Parkinson's disease and multiple system atrophy who had refractory overactive bladder symptoms and detrusor overactivity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All participants underwent clinical and urodynamic assessment, and completed a quality of life questionnaire before botulinum toxin type A treatment, and 1 and 3 months thereafter. Four patients with Parkinson's disease and 2 with multiple system atrophy were enrolled in the study. All patients received 200 U botulinum toxin type A injected into the detrusor muscle at 20 sites under cystoscopic guidance at a single session on an inpatient basis. Outcome measures were clinical assessment (a voiding diary including daytime and nighttime urinary frequency, and episodes of urgency and urge urinary incontinence), urodynamic assessment (including first volume and maximum pressure of uninhibited detrusor contractions, and maximum cystometric capacity) and pressure flow studies. RESULTS: One and 3 months after botulinum toxin type A injection all patients reported that daytime and nighttime urinary frequency had decreased and quality of life scores improved. No patients had further episodes of urgency and urge urinary incontinence during the 5-month followup. Urodynamics showed improvement in all urinary function variables tested. No systemic side effects were recorded during or after treatment. In all patients post-void urinary residual volume increased and intermittent catheterization was required only in those with multiple system atrophy. CONCLUSIONS: The new beneficial effect that we report in a small study sample encourages larger trials to confirm botulinum toxin type A injection into the detrusor muscle as an effective and safe treatment for refractory overactive bladder symptoms and detrusor overactivity related to Parkinson's disease and multiple system atrophy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, tolerability and efficacy of adjuvant intravesical gemcitabine versus bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) in the treatment of high-risk superficial bladder cancer. METHOD: 64 patients with high-risk superficial bladder cancer (pT1 and/or G3 and/or CIS) were assigned to interventions (gemcitabine or BCG) in a randomised controlled trial. All the patients were evaluated for recurrence and progression rates (primary endpoint) and safety and tolerability (secondary endpoint). RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. Tolerability was better for gemcitabine, whereas the BCG group experienced the need for delayed treatment or withdrawal in 12.5% of cases. At a mean follow-up of 44 months, the recurrence rate in patients treated with BCG was 28.1%; the recurrence rate in patients who received gemcitabine was 53.1% (p = 0.037). Time to recurrence was shorter in patients treated with BCG (25.6 vs. 39.4 months, p = 0.042). No patients developed disease progression. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine is significantly inferior to BCG, but given its favourable toxicity profile, it may be useful for patients intolerant to or otherwise unable to receive BCG.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the impact of Burch colposuspension as an anti-incontinence measure in patients with urinary incontinence undergoing abdominal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 47 women with pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence were randomly assigned to abdominal pelvic organ prolapse repair and concomitant Burch colposuspension (24 patients, group A) or pelvic organ prolapse repair alone without an anti-incontinence procedure (23 patients, group B). They were followed up at 3, 6 and 9 months after surgery, and then annually. The primary outcome measures were anatomical outcome and changes in incontinence status as indicated by a bladder diary, the number of daily pads and the stress test. Secondary end points were changes in subjective symptoms and quality of life as measured by the Urogenital Distress Inventory and the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire. RESULTS: In group A 13 of 24 patients (54.2%) were still incontinent after surgery compared with 9 of 23 (39.1%) in group B. The intragroup difference was significant (group A p = 0.003, group B p = 0.0001), but there was no significant intergroup difference (p = 0.459 for A vs B). No significant intergroup difference emerged in anatomical outcome. Urogenital Distress Inventory and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire scores improved in both groups (p = 0.0001) but the intergroup difference was not significant in either questionnaire (p = 0.769 and p = 0.327, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Burch colposuspension does not provide any additional benefit in pelvic organ prolapse repair in patients with urinary incontinence.