IncobotulinumtoxinA versus onabotulinumtoxinA intradetrusor injections in patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity incontinence: a double-blind, randomized, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: A randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical study was performed on the efficacy and tolerability of IncobotulinumtoxinA (Incobot/A) vs. OnabotulinumtoxinA (OnabotA) intradetrusor injections in patients with refractory neurogenic detrusor overactivity incontinence performing intermittent catheterization. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) or multiple sclerosis were randomized to receive 30 intradetrusor injections of Incobot/A or OnabotA 200 U; 28 patients in incobotulinumtoxinA group and 29 in onabotulinumtoxinA group completed the study. Primary outcome measure was the non-inferior variation from baseline in daily urinary incontinence episodes (week 12), with a non-inferiority margin of one episode/day. Secondary outcomes measures were changes in Incontinence- Quality of Life questionnaire, Visual Analog Scale Score (bother of symptoms on Quality of Life), urodynamic parameters, occurrence of adverse effects and related costs (week 12). RESULTS: At week 12, mean value of difference in urinary incontinence episodes/day between the two groups was -0.2 (95% two-sided CI: -1; 0.7); the difference in incontinence episodes/day between the two groups was -0.4 with a higher limit of one-sided 95% CI of 0.2 episodes/day which was much lower than the non-inferiority margin of one episode/day. Total score and subscores of Incontinence- Quality of Life questionnaire, Visual Analog Scale scores and urodynamics did not show differences between the two groups. Adverse effects were similar for both treatments, with urinary tract infection being the most frequent, localised effect. Minor costs were observed following Incobot/A. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with refractory neurogenic incontinence due to SCI or multiple sclerosis, incobotulinumtoxinA was not inferior to onabotulinumtoxinA in improving clinical and urodynamic findings in the short-term follow-up, with comparable adverse effects but minor costs.

The Impact of Lockdown on Couples' Sex Lives.

BACKGROUND: the aim of this study was to perform an Italian telematics survey analysis on the changes in couples' sex lives during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) lockdown. METHODS: a multicenter cross sectional study was conducted on people sexually active and in stable relationships for at least 6 months. To evaluate male and female sexual dysfunctions, we used the international index of erectile function (IIEF-15) and the female sexual function index (FSFI), respectively; marital quality and stability were evaluated by the marital adjustment test (items 10-15); to evaluate the severity of anxiety symptoms, we used the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale. The effects of the quarantine on couples' relationships was assessed with questions created in-house. RESULTS: we included 2149 participants. The sex lives improved for 49% of participants, particularly those in cohabitation; for 29% it deteriorated, while for 22% of participants it did not change. Women who responded that their sex lives deteriorated had no sexual dysfunction, but they had anxiety, tension, fear, and insomnia. Contrarily, men who reported deteriorating sex lives had erectile dysfunctions and orgasmic disorders. In both genders, being unemployed or smart working, or having sons were risk factors for worsening the couples' sex lives. CONCLUSION: this study should encourage evaluation of the long-term effects of COVID-19 on the sex lives of couples.

Continuing care for patients affected by urologic chronic pelvic pain in the era of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic.

AIMS: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic poses a challenge to treatment of patients with urologic chronic pelvic pain (UCPP), who are at risk to be postponed in the priority of care. We investigated pain, catastrophizing, and psychological status in UCPP patients during SARS-CoV-2 by means of Skype telephone calls. METHODS: A total of 28 UCPP patients underwent Skype video consultations. Pain intensity was assessed with Pain Numerical Rating Scale (PNRS). Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21) were used to assess catastrophizing and psychological status. RESULTS: During SARS-CoV-2, UCPP patients showed higher intensity of pain than before (mean ± SD PNRS score: 7.25 ± 0.9 vs. 5.4 ± 0.7; p < .0001), with pain exacerbation in 75%; they showed higher PCS and DASS-21 scores as compared to before the pandemic (mean ± SD PCS total score: 32.4 ± 1.2 vs. 23.7 ± 3.5; mean ± SD DASS-21 total score: 42.03 ± 4.5 vs. 34.4 ± 2.2; p < .001 and p < .001, respectively). CONCLUSION: During SARS-CoV-2 pandemic UCPP patients presented with high intensity of pain, marked catastrophizing thoughts and severe alteration of the psychological status. These observations impose the need not to postpone assessment and treatment of these patients during the pandemic. Remote visits with video telephone calls are a simple way of continuing care in UCPP patients.