Research
Urinary urge incontinence: randomised crossover trials of
penthienate versus placebo and propantheline
Graham M Coombes and Richard J Millard
MJA 1996; 165: 473-476
Abstract -
Introduction -
Methods -
Results -
Discussion -
Acknowledgements -
References -
Authors' details
-
-
More articles on Obstetrics & gynaecology and women's health
Abstract |
Objective: To compare the efficacy of penthienate with that of
propantheline and placebo for treatment of primary idiopathic
detrusor instability. Design: Two prospective, randomised, crossover
trials (double-blind for penthienate versus placebo and
non-blinded for penthienate versus propantheline). Setting: Urology Clinic of Prince Henry Hospital, Sydney, NSW (an
outpatient clinic of a tertiary referral hospital), in
1993-1994. Participants: Neurologically intact patients with
urodynamically proven detrusor instability, urgency and urge
incontinence, but no stress incontinence (20 participated in the
penthienate/placebo trial and 23 in the penthienate/propantheline
trial). Outcome measures: Cystometrography results before and after
treatment; frequency and volumes of urine voided in weeks 1 and 4 of
treatment; and patient scores for degree of continence, side
effects, efficacy and acceptability of treatment. Interventions: Penthienate (5 mg), propantheline (15 mg) or placebo
(all three times a day) for 4 weeks. Results: Penthienate produced significantly greater improvements
than placebo in frequency (daytime, P = 0.002; and
night-time, P = 0.02), incontinence scores (P =
0.002) and amplitude of unstable detrusor contractions, when
present (P = 0.01), and significantly increased diurnal and
nocturnal bladder capacity, both on cystometrography (P =
0.003) and by voiding-diary records (P < 0.001). It also
increased residual urine volume over the baseline level, but not
significantly. Side effects, especially dry mouth, were common with
penthienate, and one patient developed urinary retention.
Penthienate was significantly better than propantheline in
improving cystometric capacity (P = 0.03), and reducing the
amplitude of unstable detrusor contractions (P = 0.01), and
was perceived as more effective by patients for frequency, nocturia
and incontinence. Conclusions: Penthienate (5 mg three times a day) was objectively and
subjectively significantly better than both placebo and
propantheline (15 mg three times a day) for treatment of primary
idiopathic detrusor instability.
|
| Introduction |
Detrusor instability is a common urologic problem, causing symptoms
of urgency, frequency and urge incontinence. It is defined by the
International Continence Society as the presence of detrusor
contractions with pressure greater than 15 centimetres of water
during the filling phase of cystometrography while the patient is
trying to inhibit micturition.1 Although detrusor
instability may result from neuropathy (e.g., after spinal injury
and in multiple sclerosis, where it is best termed detrusor
hyperreflexia), in most patients it is primary and
idiopathic.2 Many treatments have been used, including bladder training,
biofeedback, anticholinergics, analgesics, muscle relaxants,
tricyclic antidepressants and acupuncture.2-7 More invasive, surgical
procedures, such as subtrigonal phenol injections,
neuromodulation and bladder augmentation, are less commonly
required. Success rates are variable, and depend partly on the cause
of the instability, but are usually no higher than 70%.8,9
The anticholinergic propantheline bromide is used worldwide for
detrusor instability and, along with oxybutynin, is among the most
often studied anticholinergic agents. However, penthienate
bromide, which was originally marketed in Australia for
gastrointestinal spasm, has been in clinical use for detrusor
instability at Prince Henry Hospital, Sydney, NSW, and, in our
clinical experience, may be more effective than propantheline. It is
a quaternary ammonium antimuscarinic that inhibits
parasympathetic, postganglionic bladder smooth muscle receptors,
has a short half-life and is optimally absorbed from the
gastrointestinal tract on an empty stomach. However, its
comparative efficacy has not been established. We therefore
undertook randomised trials of penthienate versus placebo and
penthienate versus propantheline in primary idiopathic
detrusor instability.
|
|
Methods |
Approval for the trials was given by the Eastern Sydney Area Health
Service Ethics Committee. The trials were independent of drug
company participation or sponsorship, apart from the manufacture
and supply of placebo and penthienate tablets (for the first trial).
|
Penthienate versus placebo | |
The first trial was a prospective, randomised, double-blind
crossover trial of penthienate versus placebo. Participants were 20
neurologically intact patients recruited from the outpatient
Urology Clinic and Urodynamic Service of Prince Henry Hospital,
Sydney, NSW.
Inclusion criteria. These were:
- Age over 18 years;
- Presence of symptomatic urgency or urge incontinence;
- Detrusor instability (shown on medium-fill, room-temperature,
videourodynamic studies);
- No history of neurologic disease, narrow-angle glaucoma or severe
cardiac disease (American Heart Association Grade 3 or 4);
- No stress incontinence, bladder-outlet obstruction, significant
postvoid residual urine (residuum greater than 10% of voided
volume), current urinary tract infection or interstitial cystitis;
- No current gastrointestinal obstruction;
- No allergy or sensitivity to anticholinergic agents;
- Not pregnant; and
- Patient gave informed consent to active and placebo treatment.
First phase. The trial began with a one-week run-in
period in which patients kept charts of frequency and volume of urine
voided. Informed consent was then obtained and patients were
randomised in a double-blind fashion to placebo or penthienate.
Codes were generated from randomisation tables in blocks of ten, and
provided in sealed envelopes by the Pharmacy Department; neither
patients nor investigators knew the code until after collection of
all follow-up data.
Patients received either placebo or penthienate (5 mg three times a
day before meals) for four weeks. Dosage reduction was ethically
necessary if the patient developed blurred vision, severe
constipation, or excessive mouth dryness that interfered with
nutrition. Placebo and penthienate tablets were made to the same
size, shape and colour specifications by the manufacturer and stored
in the refrigerator.
Assessment. All patients were asked to keep records
of frequency and volume of urine voided for two 72-hour periods in the
first and fourth weeks of treatment. A visual analogue score for
continence was also kept (from 1 [nil leakage], to 5 [wet all the time])
and episodes of incontinence were noted. Apart from keeping voiding
diaries at the set times, patients were taught no formal bladder-
training techniques.
In the final (fourth) week of treatment, patients attended the
outpatient clinic for assessment. History was taken and time/volume
charts collected. Medium-fill room-temperature saline-filling
cystometrography was performed by the urology registrar, and
residual urine volume, flow rate, cystometric capacity and
incidence and amplitude of any unstable detrusor contractions were
recorded. Urodynamic methods, definitions and units conformed to
the standards recommended by the International Continence
Society.1In addition,
patients scored side effects, efficacy of treatment and willingness
to have that treatment in the future on a scale of 1-100.
Second phase. After a five-day washout period,
patients crossed to the other arm of the trial. As it was not considered
ethical to subject patients to a further urodynamic study during this
period (to prove stable disease course), treatment-period
interaction could not be totally excluded. Again, treatment was for
four weeks, with the same assessment as previously.
|
Penthienate versus propantheline | |
The second trial was an unblinded, prospective, randomised
crossover trial of penthienate and propantheline in 23 patients with
detrusor instability. Inclusion criteria, run-in period and
randomisation were the same as those in the first trial,
except that neither patients nor observers were blinded to the
treatment. Patients received either penthienate (5 mg three times a
day) or propantheline (15 mg three times a day) for four weeks. There
was no placebo arm. All patients were then assessed as outpatients,
with the same outcome measures as those in the first trial. After a
five-day drug washout period, patients crossed over to receive the
other medication for a further four weeks before reassessment.
|
Statistical analyses | |
Analysis of paired data was by the Wilcoxon matched-pairs
signed-rank test. Unpaired group data were analysed with the
Mann-Whitney U test.
|
|
Results |
|
Penthienate versus placebo | |
Patients comprised 16 women and four men, with median age 63.5 years
(range, 36-85). Urological baseline characteristics are shown in
Box 1. There were no significant differences in baseline data between
those patients receiving placebo first and those receiving
penthienate first.
To investigate the possibility of a carryover effect of penthienate
in patients who received placebo second, the data were analysed
initially in groups according to which drug had been given first. In
the placebo arm of the trial there were no significant differences in
cystometric capacity, residual postvoid volume, amplitude of
unstable detrusor contractions, flow rate, frequency, nocturia or
subjective incontinence scores between patients who took placebo
first and those who took it second. Thus, five days was adequate for
washout of penthienate. Thereafter, data were analysed without
regard to which drug was taken first.
Continence and urodynamic characteristics after penthienate and
placebo treatment are shown in Box 1. After penthienate treatment,
there were increases over the baseline in daytime voiding interval,
mean voided volume (daytime and night-time) and cystometric
capacity, and decreases in night-time frequency and subjective
incontinence score. Values for all these parameters were
significantly "better" after penthienate than after placebo. The
decrease in median incontinence score with penthienate was
dramatic, from a baseline of 5 ("wet all the time") to 1 ("nil
leakage"), compared with 4 for placebo. Ten of 20 patients taking
penthienate became dry (incontinence score of 1, 50% cure rate),
compared with only two patients taking placebo.
The same 10 patients taking penthienate were also completely
stable (detrusor pressure < 15 cm H2O) to a
capacity of 500 mL on cystometrography. Among the other 10, the median
amplitude of unstable detrusor contractions was reduced from 40 to 27
cm H2O. However, with placebo only four patients (20%)
tested stable and the other 16 had unstable detrusor contractions,
with a median pressure of 30 cm H2O. The difference
between the penthienate and placebo groups in detrusor pressures in
those patients who remained unstable was significant (P =
0.05).
Residual urine volume increased from the baseline level in the
penthienate group and decreased in the placebo group, but neither
change was significant. However, the resulting difference between
penthienate and placebo residual volumes was significant (P =
0.02).
Urine flow rate increased significantly in both the penthienate and
placebo group over the baseline level (P = 0.01), but did not
differ significantly between the two groups. The increase in flow
rate appeared to be related to the increase in voided volume, as there
was no change in percentile performance on the Haylen Liverpool flow
nomogram.10
Side effects of treatment were common with penthienate (Box 2). All
patients mentioned a dry mouth, and in one elderly patient this led to
difficulty swallowing, which necessitated reducing the
penthienate dose. Although 11 of 20 patients taking placebo also
mentioned mouth dryness, the scores for degree were significantly
less than for penthienate. A patient taking penthienate complained
of diarrhoea, but there was no evidence of faecal impaction to suggest
spurious diarrhoea caused by decreased gastrointestinal motility.
Another patient taking penthienate in the second phase of the
trial developed chronic urinary retention (with a residual postvoid
volume of 550 mL). This patient's results were excluded from the
analysis.
Patients' subjective impressions of treatment are also shown in Box
2. There was a significant preference for penthienate compared with
placebo in both perceived efficacy and willingness for retreatment
(P = 0.002). Penthienate was considered beneficial by 17
(85%), but placebo by only five (25%). Two patients preferred placebo
to penthienate; their cystometric capacities and filling pressures
on testing differed little between penthienate and placebo, but
their voiding diaries showed greater daytime and night-time voided
volumes during the penthienate arm.
|
Penthienate versus propantheline | |
Patients comprised 18 women and five men, with median age 63 years
(range, 34-85). Propantheline was given first to 12 patients and
penthienate to 11.
Baseline characteristics are compared with those after
propantheline and penthienate treatment in Box 3. Both penthienate
and propantheline significantly increased daytime voiding
interval, cystometric capacity and flow rate over baseline figures.
However, the improvements in cystometric capacity were
significantly greater with penthienate than with
propantheline. Furthermore, penthienate, but not propantheline, significantly increased voided volume (both daytime
and night-time) and decreased night-time frequency and the
incidence of incontinence (by patient score). Consequently,
daytime voided volume and incontinence score were significantly
"better" for penthienate than for propantheline. The difference in
incontinence score was dramatic -- 1.5 after penthienate (where 1 =
"nil leakage"), but 5 ("wet all the time") after propantheline.
Stable cystometrograms were seen in 13 of the 23 patients
(56%) after penthienate, but in only 10 (43%) after propantheline. In
the patients with residual unstable detrusor contractions, the
amplitude of these contractions decreased with penthienate but
increased with propantheline, which led to a significant difference
between the two treatments (P = 0.01).
Although residual urine volume increased over the baseline value
with penthienate, the change was not significant. Similarly,
although detrusor compliance (detrusor pressure at a given
bladder volume, which measures bladder-wall stiffness) increased
after penthienate but decreased after propantheline, none of the
changes were significant and did not lead to significant differences
between the two drug treatments.
Side effects and subjective response to treatment are shown in Box 4.
Mouth dryness was significantly worse with penthienate, but
patients believed that it had significantly greater efficacy and
were more willing to repeat penthienate treatment.
|
|
Discussion |
Our trials showed a significantly greater response to penthienate
than to placebo or propantheline treatment, both objectively and
subjectively, in primary idiopathic detrusor instability. For drug
therapy to be useful in this condition, it needs to be more effective
than placebo, which can produce significant improvement11 (up to 43%, or
as high as that of some active drug therapies).12 In addition, results
should be at least as good as those that can be achieved with
non-invasive therapies such as bladder training, without
intolerable side effects. The Urology Clinic at Prince Henry
Hospital has previously shown that bladder training and/or
biofeedback gives up to 74% cure or improvement in symptoms of
detrusor instability.5
In this study, we found that after penthienate
there were objective improvements in bladder capacity, stability
and amplitude of unstable detrusor contractions and 50%-56% of
patients became objectively dry. There were also improvements in
subjective criteria for continence after penthienate, with 85%
feeling subjectively cured or improved. These subjective criteria
were included to assess clinical worth from the patients'
perspective, as statistical significance may not necessarily
equate with clinical significance.4 There have been no previous comparative trials of the relative
efficacy of penthienate and propantheline for detrusor
instability. We found that, in the doses studied (manufacturer's
recommended starting doses), both produced some urodynamic and
symptomatic improvements, but that penthienate was significantly
better than propantheline in improving cystometric capacity and
reducing the amplitude of unstable detrusor contractions, and was
perceived as more effective by patients for frequency, nocturia and
incontinence.
Most recent studies on propantheline in detrusor instability have
compared it with another anticholinergic, oxybutynin, which has
been found to produce response rates of up to 60% and a median increase
in cystometric capacity of 104 mL;13 it was more effective than
propantheline in some studies,12,14 but not
others.15 Similarly as for
penthienate, the price of its therapeutic effect was a higher
residual urine volume and higher rate of side effects.12 However, as we
found for penthienate, the anticholinergic side effects were
generally tolerable and, if the treatment was discontinued,
short-lived. Nevertheless, in detrusor hyperreflexia caused by
multiple sclerosis oxybutynin and propantheline treatment had to be
discontinued because of side effects in 22% and 27% of patients,
respectively.15
We conclude that penthienate bromide has a significant place in the
management of detrusor overactivity. It has been our practice to use
penthienate as first-line drug treatment in those patients with
idiopathic detrusor instability not responsive to conservative
measures such as bladder training and biofeedback. Unfortunately,
it is currently unavailable in Australia as it is no longer
manufactured locally.
The side effects of anticholinergic treatment are well recognised
and occurred with both penthienate and propantheline. With
appropriate modifications of dosage (e.g., in the elderly, who are
more likely to have side effects, and in those with neurogenic
bladders and detrusor hyperreflexia caused by multiple sclerosis,
who are more sensitive to penthienate), most patients can tolerate
these side effects and still benefit from therapy. Treatment should
start with the lowest therapeutic dose and be monitored closely to
maximise patient compliance if long term use is considered.
|
Acknowledgements | |
Winthrop Laboratories manufactured and supplied the penthienate
(Monodral) and placebo tablets for the first crossover trial. We
thank Dorothy Wheeler, RN, and Marilynne Berg, RN, of the Urology
Training Unit, Prince Henry Hospital, for their help in the follow-up
studies.
|
|
References |
- Abrams P, Blaivas JG, Stanton SL, Andersen JT. The standardisation
of terminology of lower urinary tract function. Scand J Urol
Nephrol 1988; Suppl 114: 5-19.
-
Tapp AJS, Cardozo LD, Versi E, Cooper D. The treatment of detrusor
instability in controlled study postmenopausal women with
oxybutynin chloride: a double blind placebo. Br J Obstet
Gynaecol 1990; 97: 521-526.
-
Blaivas JG, Labib KB, Michalik SK, Zayed AAH. Cystometric response
to propantheline in detrusor hyperreflexia: therapeutic
implications. J Urol 1980; 124: 259.
-
Wein AJ. Pharmacologic treatment of incontinence. J Am Geriatr
Soc 1990; 38: 317-328.
-
Millard RJ, Oldenburg BF. The symptomatic, urodynamic and
psychodynamic results of bladder re-education programs. J
Urol 1983; 53: 565-566.
-
Chang PL. Urodynamic studies in acupuncture for women with
frequency, urgency and dysuria. J Urol 1988; 140: 563-566.
-
Burgio KL, Engel BT. Biofeedback-assisted behavioural training
for elderly men and women. J Am Geriatr Soc 1990; 38: 338-340.
-
Koldewijn EL, Rijkhoff NJM, van Kerrebroeck PE, et al. Selective
stimulation of sacral nerves for bladder control: a computer model.
Neurourol Urodyn 1992; 11: 328-330.
-
Mundy AR. Detrusor instability. Br J Urol 1988; 62:
393-397.
-
Haylen BT, Ashby D, Sutherst JR, et al. Maximum and average urine
flow rates in normal male and female populations -- the Liverpool
nomograms. Br J Urol 1989; 64: 30-38.
-
Benson H, Epstein MD. The placebo effect. JAMA 1975; 232:
1225.
-
Thuroff JW, Bunke B, Ebner A, et al. Randomized, double blind,
multicenter trial on treatment of frequency, urgency and
incontinence related to detrusor hyperactivity: oxybutynin versus
propantheline versus placebo. J Urol 1991; 145: 813-817.
-
Moore KH, Hay DM, Imrie AE, et al. Oxybutynin Hydrochloride (3 mg)
in the treatment of women with idiopathic detrusor instability.
Br J Urol 1990; 66: 479-485.
-
Gajewski JB, Awad SA. Oxybutynin versus propantheline in
patients with multiple sclerosis and detrusor hyperreflexia. J
Urol 1986; 135: 966-968.
-
Holmes DM, Montz FJ, Stanton SL. Oxybutynin versus propantheline
in the management of detrusor instability. A patient-regulated
variable dose trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989; 96: 607-612.
(Received 22 Jun, accepted 20 Jul 1996)
|
| Authors' details |
Department of Urology, Prince Henry Hospital, Sydney, NSW.
Graham M Coombes, FRACS, Urology Registrar. Currently,
Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW; Richard J Millard,
FRACS, FRCS, Associate Professor of Urology, University of NSW,
Sydney, NSW.
Reprints: Dr G M Coombes, 74 Osborne Road, Lane Cove, NSW 2066.
|
|
1: Continence and urodynamic characteristics before and after treatment with penthienate and placebo (median and range)* | | Baseline (n = 20) | Penthienate (n = 19)† | Placebo (n = 19)† | P‡ |
| Daytime voiding interval (hours) | 2 (1-5) | 3 (2-6) | 2 (1-4) | 0.002 | Night-time frequency (times) | 2.5 (1-6) | 1 (0-5) | 2 (0-4) | 0.02 | Mean daytime voided volume (mL) | 200 (75-400) | 270 (125-400) | 168 (50-300) | 0.0002 | Mean night-time voided volume (mL) | 250 (50-650) | 300 (195-740) | 275 (50-700) | 0.02 | Incontinence score§ | 5 (2-5) | 1 (1-5) | 4 (1-5) | 0.002 | Urodynamic testing | Cystometric capacity (mL) | 283 (150-450) | 500 (225-600) | 400 (200-500) | 0.003 | Amplitude of unstable detrusor contractions (cm H2O)¶ | 40 (16-80) | 27 (16-40) | 30 (20-45) | 0.05 | Residual postvoid volume (mL) | 30 (0-160) | 40 (0-150) | 15 (5-50) | 0.02 | Flow rate (mL/s) | 14 (6-25) | 17 (10-30) | 20 (15-45) | 0.68 | Number of patients | With stable cystometrogram** | 0 | 10 | 4 | NA | "Dry" (incontinence score of 1) | 0 | 10 | 2 | NA |
| NA=not assessed. *Unless otherwise stated. †One patient was excluded because of chronic urinary retention. ‡ For difference between penthienate and placebo. § On analogue scale, with range 1 ("nil leakage") to 5 ("wet all the time"). ¶ n = 10 for penthienate and n = 16 for placebo, after exclusion of subjects with stable cystometrogram. ** Detrusor pressure < 15 cm H2O on filling cystometrography to a capacity of 500 mL.
|
| Back to text | 2: Side effects and subjective patient impressions of penthienate and placebo | | Penthienate | Placebo |
| Dry mouth | Number of patients | 20 (100%) | 11 (55%) | Mean score (range)* | 65 (25-95) | 25 (0-80) | Nasal dryness | 2 (10%) | 0 | Constipation/lower abdominal pain | 1 (5%) | 0 | Upper abdominal pain | 1 (5%) | 0 | Blurred vision | 1 (5%) | 0 | Chronic urinary retention | 1 (5%) | 0 | Mean subjective efficacy (range)* | 80 (10-95) | 23 (0-95) | Number of patients | Improved | 17 (85%) | 5 (25%) | Willing to repeat treatment | 12 (60%) | 5 (25%) |
| * Subjective score on scale of 0-100. Patient had diagnosed hiatus hernia, but no documented peptic ulcer or reflux oesophagitis.
|
| Back to text | 3: Continence and urodynamic characteristics before and after treatment with penthienate and propantheline (median and range)* | | Baseline (n = 23) | Penthienate (n = 23) | Propantheline (n = 23) | P † |
| Daytime voiding interval (hours) | 2 (1-5) | 3 (2-6) | 3 (2-4) | 0.53 | Night-time frequency (times) | 2 (1-6) | 1 (0-5) | 2 (1-6) | 0.07 | Mean daytime voided volume (mL) | 200 (75-400) | 260 (125-400) | 200 (125-450) | 0.001 | Mean night-time voided volume (mL) | 250 (50-650) | 300 (195-740) | 325 (230-550) | 0.17 | Incontinence score‡ | 5 (2-5) | 1.5 (1-5) | 5 (1-5) | 0.001 | Urodynamic testing | Cystometric capacity (mL) | 280 (150-450) | 500 (225-600) | 470 (275-550) | 0.03 | Amplitude of unstable detrusor contractions (cm H2O) | 40 (15-80) | 27 (16-40) | 50 (20-75) | 0.01 | Residual postvoid volume (mL) | 25 (0-160) | 37 (0-150) | 17.5 (0-100) | 0.1 | Flow rate (mL/s) | 15 (6-29) | 20 (10-50) | 20 (15-35) | 0.48 | Compliance (mL/cmH2O) | 70 (12-210) | 100 (23-600) | 55 (14-166) | 0.08 | Number with stable cystometrogram§ | 0 | 13 | 10 | NA |
| NA=not assessed. * Unless otherwise stated. † For difference between penthienate and propantheline. ‡ On analogue scale, with range 1 ("nil leakage") to 5 ("wet all the time"). § Detrusor pressure < 15 cm H2O on filling cystometrography to a capacity of 500 mL.
|
| Back to text |
4: Side effects and subjective patient impressions of penthienate and propantheline | | Penthienate | Propantheline | P* |
| Mean score for subjective efficacy† (range) | 83 (10-95) | 38 (5-90) | 0.002 | Mean score for mouth dryness† (range) | 73 (25-45) | 55 (30-90) | 0.05 | Mean score for constipation† (range) | 5 (0-50) | 7 (0-75) | 0.73 | Number of patients "dry" (incontinence score, 1) | 13 | 10 | NA | Number of patients improved | 19 | 13 | NA | Number of patients willing to repeat treatment | 12 | 11 | NA |
| NA=not assessed. * By Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test. † Subjective score on scale of 0-100.
|
| Back to text |
|