Premium
Meta‐analysis of the efficacy and safety of mirabegron and solifenacin monotherapy for overactive bladder
Author(s) -
Wang Jipeng,
Zhou Zhongbao,
Cui Yuanshan,
Li Yongwei,
Yuan Hejia,
Gao Zhenli,
Zhu Zhe,
Wu Jitao
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
neurourology and urodynamics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.918
H-Index - 90
eISSN - 1520-6777
pISSN - 0733-2467
DOI - 10.1002/nau.23863
Subject(s) - solifenacin , mirabegron , overactive bladder , medicine , urology , adverse effect , randomized controlled trial , urination , meta analysis , urinary system , alternative medicine , pathology
Aim We conducted a meta‐analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of mirabegron (50 mg) and solifenacin (5 mg) monotherapy for overactive bladder (OAB) during a 12‐week cycle. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mirabegron and solifenacin for OAB were searched systematically by using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. The reference lists of retrieved studies were also perused. Results Five RCTs which compared solifenacin with mirabegron were studied. Mirabegron achieved the same effect as solifenacin in treating OAB. The mean number of incontinence episodes per 24 h ( P = 0.20), mean number of micturitions per 24 h ( P = 0.11), mean number of urgency episodes per 24 h ( P = 0.23), and mean volume voided per micturition ( P = 0.05) suggested that mirabegron and solifenacin had no significant differences in terms of OAB treatment. With regard to drug‐related treatment‐emergent adverse events (DR‐TEAEs) and dry mouth, mirabegron showed better tolerance than solifenacin. Post‐voiding residual volume showed a distinct difference in the two groups. Hypertension and tachycardia did not show a significant difference between the two groups, but the pulse rate did. Conclusion The therapeutic effect of mirabegron is similar to that of solifenacin, and mirabegron does not increase the risk of adverse events (AEs).