Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  758 860 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 758 860 Next Page
Page Background

1.

Introduction

Nocturia is defined by the International Continence Society

(ICS) as the complaint that an individual has to wake at night

one or more times to void

[1] .

It reflects the relationship

between the amount of urine produced while asleep, and the

storage by the bladder of urine received. Nocturia can occur

as part of lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD), notably in

overactive bladder syndrome (OAB). Nocturia can also occur

in association with other forms of LUTD, such as bladder

outlet obstruction or chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Nocturia

is a feature of systemic conditions affecting water and salt

balance

[2] ,

leading to excessive production of urine at all

times (global polyuria) or primarily at night (nocturnal

polyuria), so that nocturia can be a systemic symptom

[3,4] .

For example, cardiovascular, endocrine, and renal

disease can affect water and salt homeostasis

[5]

, leading to

increased rate of urine production.

Summarizing the causative categories for nocturia, the

International Consultation on Male Lower Urinary Tract

symptoms (LUTS)

[6]

listed:

1. Bladder storage problems;

2. 24-h (global) polyuria (

>

40 ml/kg urine output over a

24-h period);

3. Nocturnal polyuria (nocturnal output exceeding 20% of

24-h urine output in younger patients, or 33% of urine

output in people aged over 65 yr

[1]

);

4. Sleep disorders;

5. Mixed etiology.

Thus, the treatment of nocturia is potentially complex,

and was identified by the European Association of Urology

Guidelines Panel for Male

[7_TD$DIFF]

non-neurogenic LUTS as a key

challenge. The aim of the current systematic review of

treatment was to assess and compare available therapy

options for nocturia, in terms of symptom severity and

quality of life. The review focusses on men, in view of the

differing lower urinary tract anatomy and medication

options available compared with women.

2.

Evidence acquisition

The objectives were to determine the relative benefits and

harms of treatment options for nocturia, and to perform

subgroup and/or sensitivity analysis.

The Embase, Medline, Cochrane Systematic Reviews, and

Cochrane Central (Cochrane Health Technology Assessment,

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health

Economics Evaluations Database) were searched with no

restriction on date of publication (date of final search

September 2016). The search strategy was registered on

PROSPERO on October 21, 2015

( http://dx.doi.org/10.15124/ CRD42015027092 )

. Comparative studies were included

(randomized controlled trials [RCTs], and nonrandomized

comparative studies [both prospective and retrospective,

interventional, or observational]), studying adult men

(male-only or mixed sex populations), with nocturia or

nocturnal polyuria as a primary outcome, categorized within

the following symptom groups:

1. Nocturia (ICS definition

[7]

, or as defined by trialist) as

the primary presentation (ie, nocturia as the predomi-

nant bothersome symptom);

2. Nocturia as a secondary component of LUTS (ie, LUTS

including nocturia);

3. Nocturnal polyuria (ICS definition

[7]

, or alternative

definition if stated by the investigating group).

Interventions included: anticholinergics, mirabegron,

a

-blockers, 5-

a

reductase inhibitors, oral phosphodiester-

ase-5 inhibitors, desmopressin, diuretics, sleep-promoting

agents, and phytotherapy. Comparator controls were:

no treatment, placebo, and alternative experimental

treatment.

The primary outcomes were:

- Symptom severity for nocturia (outcome measure defined

as

<

2 episodes, or cure [ie, no episodes of nocturia] or

reduction in nocturia episodes, or as defined by trialist);

- Quality of life for nocturia.

The secondary outcomes were:

- Harms: adverse events of treatment and events leading to

potential harm (eg, hyponatremia, voiding difficulties),

withdrawal, or drop-out rates;

- Any other outcomes judged relevant by reviewer.

Two review authors independently screened the titles

and abstracts of identified records, and the full text of

potentially eligible records was evaluated using a stan-

dardized form. Risk of bias was assessed, including: random

sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding,

incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other

sources of bias. A list of potential confounders was

Conclusions:

Issues of trial design make therapy of nocturia a challenging topic. The range of

contributory factors relevant in nocturia makes it desirable to identify predictors of response

to guide therapy. Consistent responses were reported for titrated antidiuretic therapy. For

other therapies, responses were less certain, and potentially of limited clinical benefit.

Patient summary:

This review provides an overview of the current drug treatments of

nocturia, which is the need to wake at night to pass urine. The symptom can be caused by

several different medical conditions, and measuring its severity and impact varies in

separate research studies. No single treatment deals with the symptom in all contexts,

and careful assessment is essential to make suitable treatment selection.

#

2017 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

E U R O P E A N U R O L O G Y 7 2 ( 2 0 1 7 ) 7 5 7 – 7 6 9

758