Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation and Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation to Treat Idiopathic Nonobstructive Urinary Retention: A Systematic Review
Rosa L. Coolen, Jan Groen, Jeroen R. Scheepe, Bertil Blok
Abstract
CONTEXT: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (PTNS) provide minimally invasive ways to treat idiopathic nonobstructive urinary retention (NOUR). OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of TENS and PTNS for treating idiopathic NOUR. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane CENTRAL register of trials were searched for all relevant publications until April 2020. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 3307 records were screened based on the title and abstract. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria. Five studies, all from the same group, reported the efficacy of PTNS and two that of TENS in adults with idiopathic NOUR. One study reported the efficacy of TENS in children with idiopathic NOUR. Objective success was defined as a ≥50% decrease in the number of catheterizations per 24 h or in the total catheterized volume in 24 h. The objective success rate of PTNS ranged from 25% to 41%. Subjective success was defined as the patient's request for continued chronic treatment with PTNS, and ranged from 46.7% to 59%. Eighty percent of women who underwent transvaginal stimulation reported an improvement such as a stronger stream when voiding. TENS in children reduced postvoid residual and urinary tract infections. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of TENS and PTNS in the treatment of idiopathic NOUR is limited and should be verified in larger randomized studies before application in clinical practice. PATIENT SUMMARY: The outcomes of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation for the treatment of urinary retention of unknown origin were reviewed. Whether these treatments are superior to other treatments could not be established.