Send to

Choose Destination
Urology. 2017 Aug;106:183-187. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2017.04.035. Epub 2017 May 2.

Neurostimulation Therapy for Pediatric Primary Enuresis: A Meta-analysis.

Author information

Division of Urology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada. Electronic address:
Division of Urology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada.
Institute of Urology, St. Luke's Medical Center, Quezon City, Philippines.
Division of Urology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada; Division of Urology, University of Sao Paulo Medical School, Sao Paulo, Brazil.



To assess the efficacy and safety of neurostimulation compared with control groups in the treatment of pediatric primary enuresis by performing meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).


A systematic literature search with no language restriction was performed in August 2016. RCTs were identified and evaluated according to the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias assessment recommendations. The number of patients with post-treatment responses such as partial response (PR) (50%-89%), complete response (CR) (≥90%), and full response (FR) (100%) were extracted for relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Effect estimates were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO registry (CRD42016043502).


A total of 292 subjects from 7 nonheterogeneous RCTs were included for meta-analysis. Pooled effect estimate of subjects with ≥50% post-treatment wet-night reduction (PR, CR, and FR) showed a significantly better outcome after neurostimulation compared with controls (RR = 2.20, 95% CI 1.66, 2.90), whereas patients with ≥90% post-treatment wet-night reduction (CR and FR) showed a significantly better outcome in the neurostimulation groups (RR = 2.79, 95% CI 1.54, 5.06). Furthermore, a significant mean difference in wet-night reduction per week was noted between treatment groups in favor of neurostimulation treatment (mean difference -1.95, 95% CI -2.84, -1.07). No serious adverse effects were noted related to neurostimulation therapy.


Current evidence suggests that neurostimulation therapy is efficacious and safe for the treatment of PPE. Head-to-head randomized clinical trials are needed to further assess relative efficacy among variable treatment protocols.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center