Botulinum toxin type A for the treatment of non-neurogenic overactive bladder: does using onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox®) or abobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport®) make a difference?
Pravisha Ravindra, Benjamin L. Jackson and Richard J. Parkinson
Nottingham Urology Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals, NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
• To compare the clinical effects of two different commercially available botulinum toxin type A products, onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox®; Allergan Inc., Irvine, CA, USA) and abobotulinumtoxinA (Dysport®; Ipsen Ltd, Slough, UK), on non-neurogenic overactive bladder (OAB).
PATIENTS AND METHODS
• We included 207 patients, who underwent treatment with botulinum toxin type A for non-neurogenic OAB from January 2009 to June 2012 at our institution, in a prospective database that recorded details of their presentation, treatment and outcomes.
• In December 2009, our institution switched from using onabotulinumtoxinA to using abobotulinumtoxinA.
• Results from the onabotulinumtoxinA cohort (n = 101) and the abobotulinumtoxinA cohort (n = 106) were compared.
• Similar reductions in daytime frequency, nocturia and incontinence episodes were observed after treatment, with no difference in duration of effect.
• The abobotulinumtoxinA cohort had almost twice the rate of symptomatic urinary retention (23 vs 42%) requiring intermittent self-catheterisation (ISC).
• AbobotulinumtoxinA use was complicated by a significantly higher risk of requiring ISC.
• The study suggests that these two toxins are not interchangeable at the doses used.