Number №2, 2019 - page 146-151

The results the of the comparative study of biofeedback with test electrostimulation of the pelvic floor muscles as monotherapy and in combinationwith extra-corporeal magnetic stimulation of the pelvic floor muscles DOI: 10.29188/2222-8543-2019-11-2-146-150

Borisenko L.Yu., Romih V.V., Zaharchenko A.V., Panteleev V.V., Kostin A.A., Apolihin O.I., Sivkov A.V.
Information about authors:
  • Borisenko L.Yu. – junior researcher of department of urodynamics and neurourology of N.A. Lopatkin Scientific Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – Branch of the National Medical Research Centre of Radiology of the Ministry of Health of Russian Federation, dr.borisenko-nii@yandex.ru
  • Sivkov A.V. – PhD, deputy director on scientific work of N. Lopatkin Research Institute of urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Centre of Radiology of Ministry of health of Russian Federation, uroinfo@yandex.ru, ORCID 0000-0001-8852-6485
  • Romikh V.V. – head of department of urodynamics and neurourology of N.A. Lopatkin Scientific Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – Branch of the National Medical Research Centre of Radiology of the Ministry of Health of Russian Federation, vromikh@yandex.ru
  • Zakharchenko A.V. – junior researcher of department of urodynamics and neurourology of N.A. Lopatkin Scientific Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – Branch of the National Medical Research Centre of Radiology of the Ministry of Health of Russian Federation, cor1@yandex.ru
  • Panteleev V.V. – junior researcher of department of urodynamics and neurourology of N.A. Lopatkin Scientific Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology – Branch of the National Medical Research Centre of Radiology of the Ministry of Health of Russian Federation, pantele-ev_vlad@mail.ru
  • Kostin A.A. –Dr. Sci., professor, First Deputy of General Director of the National Medical Research Centre of Radiology of Ministry of health of Russian Federation, ORCID 0000-0002-0792-6012
  • Apolikhin O.I. – Dr. Sc, professor, сor.-member of RAS, director of N. Lopatkin Research Institute of urology and Interventional Radiology – branch of the National Medical Research Centre of Radiology of Ministry of health of Russian Federation, sekr.urology@gmail.com, ORCID 0000-0003-0206-043X
287

The results the of the comparative study of biofeedback with test electrostimulation of the pelvic floor muscles as monotherapy and in combinationwith extra-corporeal magnetic stimulation of the pelvic floor muscles with functional infravesical obstruction in women

Introduction. The functional bladder outlet obstruction (fBOO) in women is one of the urgent and dif-ficult tasks of functional urology. As a conservative treatment, pelvic floor muscle training is widely used, including using the method of biofeedback (BFB).

Materials and methods. A comparative study of the results of mild-to-moderate fBOO treatment with the method of BFB with test electrostimulation of the pelvic floor muscles as monotherapy and in com-bination with electromagnetic stimulation of the pelvic floor muscles (EMS) was conducted. The eval-uation of results was carried out with the use of PGI-I scale and uroflowmetry (UFM). A group of 92 patients with urodynamically confirmed fBOO was formed. Before the start of treatment all patients were randomly assigned to two groups.

In group I (n = 46) the treatment was carried out using the BFB method (sessions - 2 times a week, total - 10). In group II (n = 46) in addition to the BFR all women were given EMS (sessions also 2 times a week, total - 10). In terms of basic UFM parameters patients in groups I and II were not statistically different (p> 0.05). Clinical efficacy was evaluated after treatment during 8 weeks based on the results of PGI-I questionnaire and UFM data.

Results. In Group I, 27 (58.7%) patientsreported an improvement on the PGI-Iscale, and 19 (41.3%)rated the outcome ofthe treatment as“no change”. The same women registered: an increase in Qmax from 11.4 ± 3.0 to 19.5 ± 2.5 or by 71.0%; Qave -from 7.3 ± 3.0 to 10.8 ± 2.5 or by 47.9%; a decrease in the amount of residual urine from 68.4 ± 1.1 to 26.9 ± 0.9, or 60.7%. In Group II, 35 participants in the study (76.1%) rated the result of treatment on the PGI-I scale as im-provement, and 11 (23.9%) rated it as “no change”.

The increase in Qmax - from 12.1 ± 2.7 to 23.4 ± 2.5 or 93.4%; Qave - from 8.6 ± 3.5 to 12.7 ± 2.5 or by 47.7%; a decrease in the amount of residual urine from 59.3 ± 1.6 to 21.5 ± 0.9, or by 63.7%. Statisticalsignificance was achieved, both in the number of patients with improvement in the groups, and in the dynamics of Qmax both within and between groups (p <0.05). None of the study participants noted any deterioration due to treatment. No adverse events were reported during the study.

Findings. BFB - therapy combined with test electrostimulation of the pelvic muscles, both in mono-therapy mode and in combination with EMS, are minimally invasive, safe and effective methods of treating dysfunctional urination in women. A combination of techniques can be recommended as a first-line therapy for mild to moderate fBOO.

Authors declare lack of the possible conflicts of interests

AttachmentSize
Download400.95 KB
biological feedback, female bladder outlet obstruction, urinary disorders, female and functional urology

Readera - Социальная платформа публикаций

Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, and assess