Efficacy and safety of vaginal electrical stimulation as an alternative or adjunct treatment for overactive bladder syndrome in women: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vaginal electrical stimulation (VES) as an alternative or adjunct treatment for overactive bladder (OAB) syndrome in women.MethodsFive English-language databases and four Chinese-language databases were searched to identify relevant studies. Studies comparing VES (VES alone or VES plus other interventions) with other interventions (medicines, bladder training, or PFMT) were included. Voiding diary, quality of life (QoL), and adverse events were extracted from the included studies for comparison.ResultsSeven trials with 601 patients in total were reviewed. The results showed that when compared with other interventions, VES alone significantly improved urgency episodes (p = 0.0008) and voiding frequency (p = 0.01), but did not significantly reduce nocturia (p = 0.85), urinary incontinence episodes (p = 0.90) and number of pads (p = 0.87). When VES plus other interventions was compared with other interventions, the former significantly improved voiding frequency (p < 0.00001), nocturia (p < 0.00001), and number of pads (p = 0.03), but it did not significantly reduce urinary incontinence episodes (p = 0.24). Both VES alone (p < 0.00001) and VES plus other interventions (p = 0.003) showed significant benefit on QoL.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that VES alone decreased urgency episodes and QoL better than other therapies. Although VES alone reduced voiding frequency better and VES plus other therapies decreased nocturia, number of pads, urgency episodes, and QoL better than other therapies, the results should be interpreted with caution for clinical practice because some of the RCTs included were of low quality and because of the small number of studies included.