Does biofeedback therapy improve quality of life in children with lower urinary tract dysfunction: parents' perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD) is a situation that often disrupts the quality of life (QoL) of both the child and the family with daytime and nighttime incontinence. Although the first-line treatment option for children with LUTD is standard urotherapy, biofeedback therapy can be performed in children in which standard urotherapy failed. OBJECTIVE: We studied the biofeedback success in children with LUTD according to parents' expressions. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed our hospital records of children who were diagnosed with LUTD between 2005 and 2017. In total, 281 patients, refractory to standard urotherapy were included into the study and directed to biofeedback treatment. Their parents completed the dysfunctional voiding symptom scores (DVSS) before and after biofeedback therapy. RESULTS: At the end of the six-month follow-up period, all voiding disorders and voiding patterns were evaluated. According to DVSS, QoL tools before biofeedback treatment 48 (17%) parents appraised that LUTD caused no effect in their children's daily life, 104 (37.8%) expressed little effect, 89 (31%) moderate effect, and 40 (14.2%) serious effect. And, 120 (43%) parents expressed no effect, 95 (34%) little effect, 51 (18%) moderate effect, and 15 (5%) serious effect (P = 0.001) after biofeedback therapy. Biofeedback therapy affected positively the daily life of LUTD's family. The less serious the effect of LUTD on these children's family, the more success rate of biofeedback therapy. The effect of biofeedback therapy was less successful in moderated and serious affected families. CONCLUSIONS: Biofeedback treatment is a non-invasive and effective treatment modality for improving the QoL for LUTD families who were less suffered from LUTD.

Biofeedback as a first-line treatment for overactive bladder syndrome refractory to standard urotherapy in children.

INTRODUCTION: Overactive bladder syndrome (OAB) and dysfunctional voiding (DV) are subgroups of lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD). Standard urotherapy is the first-line treatment option of OAB in children. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to investigate the use of biofeedback as a first-line treatment option in OAB refractory to standard urotherapy, and determine the factors affecting efficacy. STUDY DESIGN: Between 2005 and 2015, we retrospectively analyzed a total of 136 hospital records of children with OAB who had not previously used any anticholinergics and were refractory to standard urotherapy. Patients with urgency and/or urge incontinence and/or making holding maneuvers to suppress urgency were defined as having OAB symptoms, and resolution of these complaints was defined as successful biofeedback therapy. RESULTS: Seventy-three of 136 OAB patients' urgency recovered by biofeedback therapy with the success rate of 53% (p < 0.001). Sixty-two of 101 patients with holding maneuvers (success rate 61%) (p < 0.001), 70 of 101 patients with urgency incontinence (success rate 69%) (p < 0.001), 76 of 114 patients with daytime incontinence (success rate 66%) (p = 0.023), 87 of 97 patients with enuresis (success rate 89%) (p = 0.009), and 27 of 39 patients with dysuria (success rate 69%) (p = 0.007) recovered from their symptoms significantly. The mean lower urinary tract symptom score (LUTSS) was 16.38 and 8.18 before and after biofeedback therapies, respectively (p < 0.001) (Table). Patients without holding maneuvers (p = 0.045), daytime incontinence (p = 0.030), and enuresis (p = 0.045) had better recovery compared to the opposites. DISCUSSION: Biofeedback can be thought of as the first-line treatment option when standard urotherapy fails in children with OAB.

The role of urinary nerve growth factor for the diagnosis and assessment of the biofeedback success in children with dysfunctional voiding.

INTRODUCTION: Dysfunctional voiding (DV) occurs in neurologically normal children who are not able to establish brain control on detrusor muscle contractions (DMCs). It is also reported to be the result of incorrect voiding habits during toilet training. Children contract pelvic floor muscles (PFMs) to suppress DMC and DV begins. Urinary nerve growth factor (uNGF) is necessary for the synthesis and regulation of neurotransmitters, development of dorsal root ganglia (sensory neurons), and development of sympathetic cells during embryonic and post-natal life. uNGF has also a role in the intracellular signal transduction in nerve cells towards the target organ. To our knowledge, no study has investigated the association between uNGF, biofeedback treatment and DV in children. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to examine the potential effect of uNGF in the assessment of the effectiveness of biofeedback success in children with lower urinary tract disorders. STUDY DESIGN: Fifty-two children with the suspicion of DV and 48 children from a primary school reporting no urinary complaints were enrolled in this study from October 2010 to April 2013 in the Urology Department. uNGF levels were compared. RESULTS: The mean uNGF/creatinine (Cr) level was 0.23 ± 0.26 in the control group and 0.96 ± 0.88 in the DV group (p < 0.001). The mean uNGF/Cr levels in the DV group at baseline and at the end of biofeedback therapy at 6 and 12 months were 0.90 ± 0.78, 0.26 ± 0.32, and 0.40 ± 0.50, respectively (p < 0.001) (Figure). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge this study is the first to show the correlations between uNGF levels and biofeedback therapy in children with DV. Tissue NGF in 12 patients with overactive bladder (OAB)/detrusor overactivity and 15 healthy women was previously compared and it was suggested that there was no correlation between bladder tissue NGF and OAB. uNGF levels in the bladder in patients with interstitial cystitis and idiopathic sensorial urgency were evaluated previously, and uNGF levels reported. Similar to these reports, most of the previous studies handled uNGF in patients with diseases such as interstitial cystitis, OAB, urinary tract infections, urolithiasis, spinal cord injury, and prostate cancer, and found significantly higher uNGF levels. These studies were generally in adults. A previous study about uNGF comprised 40 children with OAB, in contrast to other studies. According to this study, 40 children diagnosed with OAB were administered anti-muscarinic therapy (oxybutynin 0.3-0.5 mg/kg/day). It was reported that uNGF/Cr levels of the OAB group were higher than control group. In the current study, we evaluated the uNGF difference in DV and the effect of biofeedback treatment on uNGF levels. CONCLUSIONS: uNGF levels were higher in children with DV and decreased after biofeedback therapy. uNGF levels could be used for the diagnosis and the assessment of biofeedback success in these children.