It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
In this critical review, we explore the study design, strengths, and limitations of landmark trial “Anticholinergic therapy vs. onabotulinumtoxinA for urgency urinary incontinence”. This trial was the first to directly compare two key treatment options for urge urinary incontinence – anticholinergic medication and intravesical botox, and still influences clinical guidelines a decade after publication. This non-inferiority, double-blinded, multi-centre randomised controlled trial administered Solifenacin or intra-detrusor botox to women, measuring outcomes six months post-treatment. Non-inferiority of the treatments was established, though Botox had a higher rate of retention and infection, with side effect profile rising as the key discriminator in selecting first-line therapy.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer