MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409702238 · doi:10.3390/toxins17050211

Intravesical Onabotulinum Toxin A Injection Paradigms for Idiopathic Overactive Bladder: A Scoping Review of Clinical Outcomes, Techniques, and Implications for Practice and Future Research

2025· review· en· W4409702238 on OpenAlexaff
Ekene Enemchukwu, Hodan Mohamud, Shada Sinclair, Victoria Harbour, Raveen Syan, Michael Kennelly, Susanna Gunamany

Bibliographic record

VenueToxins · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsOveractive bladderMedicineUrologyClinical PracticeNursingAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Onabotulinum toxin A (BTXA) is an effective treatment for refractory idiopathic overactive bladder (iOAB). Given the wide spectrum of patient factors and combination of symptoms, a tailored approach to management is needed. This scoping review assesses injection paradigms for iOAB. Prior studies have established the safety and efficacy of BTXA injections, and this review focuses on exploring variations in injection techniques that may inform more tailored approaches and support future research toward optimizing patient outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search. Inclusion criteria included full-text English language and primary research studies assessing outcomes in adults undergoing BTXA for iOAB. Findings are summarized using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Forty-three articles were identified. Key findings include fewer injections (1-10 vs. 20-40) maintains efficacy while reducing procedure time, discomfort, and retreatment hesitancy. Durability appears to be lower with suburothelial and bladder base injections and higher with detrusor and bladder body injections, though these may carry an increased risk of urinary retention requiring clean intermittent catheterization. Trigone inclusion appears safe and effective without increased vesicoureteral reflux risk. CONCLUSIONS: Study heterogeneity and inconsistent reporting limit strong conclusions. Included injection paradigms demonstrated efficacy, high tolerability, symptom relief, and quality-of-life improvements with few adverse events. Further research is needed to refine optimal injection strategies to enhance patient comfort, maximize efficacy, and minimize adverse events. Future studies should ensure comprehensive data collection to clarify these associations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.184
GPT teacher head0.570
Teacher spread0.386 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxinsSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207