Table 2.
Pairwise meta-analyses result for different endpoints.
| Endpoint | Comparison | N | I2 (%) | p Value | Standard Mean Difference (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Urinary frequency/ day | OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo | 4 | 92 | < 0.001 | −0.65 (-0.24–−1.06) |
| PTNS vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 1 | −1.02 (−1.55–−0.48) | |||
| PTNS vs. Placebo | 3 | 37.1 | 0.204 | −0.37 (-0.03–−0.70) | |
| SNM vs. Placebo | 1 | −1.12 (-0.53–−1.71) | |||
| Urge urine incontinence | OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo | 2 | 70.7 | 0.065 | −0.37 (−0.05–-0.79) |
| Urgency Episode | OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo | 4 | 97.6 | <0.001 | −0.84 (-0.08–-1.60) |
| Maximal | PTNS vs. Placebo | 1 | 1.35 (0.79–1.92) | ||
| SNM vs. Placebo | 1 | 0.91 (0.33–1.48) | |||
| I-QoL | OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo | 2 | 99.1 | <0.001 | 0.98 (−0.89–2.86) |
| PTNS vs. Placebo | 1 | 0.86 (0.13–1.59) | |||
| Incontinence | OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo | 3 | 97.8 | <0.001 | -0.84 (-1.62–-0.06) |
| PTNS vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 1 | 0.54 (0.02–1.06) | |||
| PTNS vs. Placebo | 1 | -1.49 (-2.28–-0.70) | |||
| SNM vs. Placebo | 2 | 74.6 | 0.047 | -2.10 (-3.07–-1.12) | |
| ≥50% Improvement | Placebo vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 2 | 0.0 | 0.410 | 0.53 (0.40–0.70) |
| PTNS vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 2 | 0.0 | 0.371 | 0.50 (0.32–0.76) | |
| Placebo vs. PTNS | 3 | 52.5 | 0.122 | 0.21 (0.07–0.61) | |
| SNM vs. Placebo | 1 | 1.27 (0.87–1.87) | |||
| Urinary tract infection | OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo | 8 | 0 | 0.486 | 2.55 (1.89–3.43) |
| PTNS vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 1 | 0.20 (0.01–4.34) | |||
| SNM vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 1 | 0.33 (0.19–0.56) | |||
| Clean intermittent catherization | OnabotulinumtoxinA vs. Placebo | 9 | 0 | 0.786 | 5.95 (3.08–11.46) |
| PTNS vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 1 | 0.20 (0.01–4.34) | |||
| SNM vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA | 1 | 0.01 (0.00–0.23) |