Comparison of micro-radiofrequency therapy and tolterodine for the treatment of newly diagnosed overactive bladder: A retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE: This study aimed to retrospectively compare the efficacy and safety of micro-radiofrequency (RF) therapy through the urethra vs. oral tolterodine tartrate in the treatment of newly diagnosed overactive bladder (OAB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, 46 patients who were newly diagnosed with moderate-to-severe OAB were included; 23 of them underwent the micro-RF treatment procedure, and the other 23 patients took tolterodine. Bladder diaries were recorded 3 days before treatment and during the follow-up period on 1, 3, and 7 weeks after micro-RF therapy or oral tolterodine. Micturition parameters including daily voiding times, daily urge urinary incontinence (UI) episodes, daily urgency episodes, mean volume per micturition, post-void residual volume (PVR), maximum urine flow rate (Qmax), overactive bladder symptom score (OABSS), and quality of life (QoL) score were analyzed. RESULTS: All 46 patients underwent either micro-RF or oral tolterodine treatment, as well as a complete follow-up. The incidence of adverse events in the micro-RF group was 8.7% (2/23), and that in the tolterodine group was 43.5% (10/23). The following two adverse events happened in the micro-RF group: an injury to the urethra during catheterization in a man and a urinary tract infection in a woman, both of which were relieved or disappeared after day 3. The adverse effects in the tolterodine group were mainly dry mouth (4/23), dysuria (5/23), and constipation (8/23), but none of the patients withdrew from the drug therapy. Compared to pre-therapy, all parameters of both groups, including daily voiding times, daily urgency episodes, mean volume per micturition, OABSS, and QoL score, demonstrated significant improvements during follow-up in 7 weeks after therapy, except for daily UI episodes in the tolterodine group, while the above parameters showed bigger improvements in the micro-RF group than in the tolterodine group. Besides, the general treatment efficacy of micro-RF was 73.9% (17/23), which was significantly better than tolterodine (10/23, 43.5%), and the difference was 30.4% [95% CI: 3.4–57.5%, p = 0.036]. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, we found that micro-RF therapy is safe and more effective than oral tolterodine for newly diagnosed moderate-to-severe OAB in a short-term follow-up. Stronger evidence would be provided through a well-designed, prospective, randomized controlled trial.