Comparison of mirabegron and vibegron for clinical efficacy and safety in female patients with overactive bladder: a multicenter prospective randomized crossover trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of mirabegron and vibegron in female OAB patients. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, randomized crossover study of female patients with OAB. The patients were assigned to Group MV (mirabegron for 8 weeks, followed by vibegron for 8 weeks) or group VM (vibegron for 8 weeks, followed by mirabegron for 8 weeks). The primary endpoint was the change in OABSS from baseline, and the secondary endpoint was the change in FVC parameters. After completion of the study, each patient was asked which drug was preferable. RESULTS: A total of 83 patients were enrolled (40 and 43 in groups MV and VM, respectively). At 8th and 16th week, 33 and 29 in Group MV and 34 and 27 in Group VM continued to receive the treatment. The change in PVR was not significantly different between treatment with mirabegron and vibegron. The changes in OABSS, nighttime frequency, mean, and maximum voided volume were similar between mirabegron and vibegron. The mean change in the daytime frequency was greater in the vibegron than in the mirabegron. Of the 56 patients, 15 (27%) and 30 (53%) preferred mirabegron and vibegron, respectively. The remaining 11 patients (20%) showed no preference. The change in the urgency incontinence score during vibegron was better in patients who preferred vibegron to mirabegron. CONCLUSION: The efficacies of mirabegron and vibegron in female patients was similar. The patients' preference for vibegron could depend on the efficacy of vibegron for urgency incontinence.

Validation of the area under the Watts factor curve during the voiding cycle as a novel parameter for diagnosing detrusor underactivity in females.

OBJECTIVE: Detrusor underactivity (DU) is a common cause of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). To date, no consensus has been reached on the urodynamic criteria for defining DU. We previously proposed the area under the curve of the Watts factor (WF-AUC) as a new parameter for diagnosing DU. By comparing previously reported five criteria for DU and WF-AUC, we analyzed whether the WF-AUC could assess detrusor contraction in women with LUTS. METHODS: Using urodynamic data of consecutive 77 women with LUTS, first, we classified DU based on previously reported five criteria. Second, we assessed the potential correlation between multiple parameters and WF-AUC. Third, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to determine the cutoff value of WF-AUC for diagnosing DU based on previously reported five criteria. Fourth, a linear regression analysis was conducted and compared using multiple criteria and female bladder outlet obstruction index (BOOIf). RESULTS: WF-AUC was positively correlated with the maximum values of WF, bladder contractility index (BCI), and projected isovolumetric pressure 1 (PIP1) with correlation coefficients of 0.63, 0.57, and 0.34, respectively. AUC for diagnosing DU based on previously reported five criteria ranging from 0.773 to 0.896 with different cutoff values of AUC-WF. The Spearman's correlation test revealed that BOOIf was significantly correlated with BCI, but not Wmax, PIP1 and WF-AUC. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the non-inferiority of the WF-AUC compared to previously reported criteria for defining DU. Depending on the cutoff value, the WF-AUC could appropriately evaluate women with DU, regardless of the presence of BOO.

Postoperative small intestinal obstruction caused by barbed suture after robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

Introduction: We present a case of small intestinal obstruction due to a barbed suture used for peritoneal closure during robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Case presentation: A female patient with pelvic organ prolapse underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy uneventfully. Intestinal obstruction developed on postoperative Day 4. Conservative treatment with the ileus tube failed to improve abdominal symptoms. The laparoscopic examination on postoperative Day 14 revealed the barbed suture entangled with the small intestinal mesentery. The tail of the barbed suture was laparoscopically detached from the mesentery without damaging the small intestine. The tail of the barbed suture was trimmed; an antiadhesive material was applied to the peritoneal closure line and the trimmed tail of the barbed suture. Conclusion: We recommend the use of conventional absorbable sutures in the peritoneal cavity because of the potential risk of intestinal obstruction caused by the barbed suture.