A systematic review and meta-analysis of neostigmine for urinary retention after surgeries.

Neostigmine meta-analysis postoperative urinary retention (POUR) urinary retention

Journal

Translational andrology and urology

ISSN: 2223-4691

Titre abrégé: Transl Androl Urol

Pays: China

ID NLM: 101581119

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Feb 2022

Historique:

received: 05 11 2021

accepted: 20 01 2022

entrez: 14 3 2022

pubmed: 15 3 2022

medline: 15 3 2022

Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The aim of this research is to analyze the efficacy of neostigmine in the treatment of postoperative urinary retention (POUR). In this research, we screened multiple databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). After a systematic search process, data extraction was conducted. Review Manager 5.2 was adopted for meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and bias analysis. After searching for articles, 20 eligible trials including 1,850 patients after surgery were extracted. Our results suggested that the neostigmine group had a higher effective rate for urinary retention than the Chinese traditional and physical therapy group (OR =7.47, 95% CI: 4.10-13.59, overall effect P<0.001). Further subgroup analysis showed that neostigmine acupoint injection was better than neostigmine intramuscular injection. Time to first voiding in the neostigmine acupoint injection group was shorter than that in the neostigmine intramuscular injection group (MD =-81.92, 95% CI: -130.13 to -33.70, overall P<0.001, I Our meta-analysis results suggest that neostigmine can effectively improve the symptoms of POUR and neostigmine acupoint injection may achieve a better therapeutic effect.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED

The aim of this research is to analyze the efficacy of neostigmine in the treatment of postoperative urinary retention (POUR).

Methods UNASSIGNED

In this research, we screened multiple databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). After a systematic search process, data extraction was conducted. Review Manager 5.2 was adopted for meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, and bias analysis.

Results UNASSIGNED

After searching for articles, 20 eligible trials including 1,850 patients after surgery were extracted. Our results suggested that the neostigmine group had a higher effective rate for urinary retention than the Chinese traditional and physical therapy group (OR =7.47, 95% CI: 4.10-13.59, overall effect P<0.001). Further subgroup analysis showed that neostigmine acupoint injection was better than neostigmine intramuscular injection. Time to first voiding in the neostigmine acupoint injection group was shorter than that in the neostigmine intramuscular injection group (MD =-81.92, 95% CI: -130.13 to -33.70, overall P<0.001, I

Discussion UNASSIGNED

Our meta-analysis results suggest that neostigmine can effectively improve the symptoms of POUR and neostigmine acupoint injection may achieve a better therapeutic effect.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.21037/tau-22-16 PMID: 35280659 PMC: PMC8899153

pubmed: 35280659

doi: 10.21037/tau-22-16

pii: tau-11-02-190

pmc: PMC8899153

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

190-201

Informations de copyright

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tau.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tau-22-16/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Références

Arch Surg. 2001 Oct;136(10):1150-3

pubmed: 11585507

Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:926953

pubmed: 26185766

Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 29;10(1):89

pubmed: 33781348

Anesthesiology. 2009 May;110(5):1139-57

pubmed: 19352147

BJS Open. 2018 Nov 19;3(1):11-23

pubmed: 30734011

World J Surg. 2018 Dec;42(12):3874-3879

pubmed: 29947990

Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018 Sep;11(3):325-331

pubmed: 29869135

Case Rep Gastrointest Med. 2013;2013:796739

pubmed: 23476830

Neurourol Urodyn. 2010 Mar;29(3):443-8

pubmed: 19260084

Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018 Sep 11;14:1685-1689

pubmed: 30254450

Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2020 Jan 19;2020:2520483

pubmed: 32051686