Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

PRISMA study flow diagram.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

PRISMA study flow diagram.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Drugs versus placebo, outcome: 1.1 Number of wet nights per week.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 4

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Drugs versus placebo, outcome: 1.1 Number of wet nights per week.

Forest plot of comparison: 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, outcome: 2.3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 5

Forest plot of comparison: 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, outcome: 2.3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.

Forest plot of comparison: 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, outcome: 5.1 Number not achieving 14 dry nights.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 6

Forest plot of comparison: 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, outcome: 5.1 Number not achieving 14 dry nights.

Forest plot of comparison: 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, outcome: 5.2 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 7

Forest plot of comparison: 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, outcome: 5.2 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment.

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 1 Number of wet nights per week.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 1 Number of wet nights per week.

Study

Drug

Placebo

amphetamine sulphate/ephedrine + atropine vs placebo

Wright 1974

Mean = 4.1, N=8

Mean = 3.5, N=10

furosemide vs placebo

Moltke 1979

Mean = 5.11, N=41

Mean = 4.69, N=44

meprobamate vs placebo

Breger 1961

Mean = 3.26, N=34

Mean = 3.21, N=33

propantheline bromide vs placebo

Leys 1956

Mean = 4.7, N=33

mean = 5.36, N=32

emepronium vs placebo

Petersen 1974#

Mean = 4.36, N=61

Mean = 4.37, N=61

indoramin 20 mg vs placebo

Shaffer 1978#

Mean = 2.6, N=14

Mean = 2.68, N=14

indoramin 10 mg vs placebo

Shaffer 1978#

Mean = 2.5, N=14

Mean = 2.68, N=14

propantheline vs placebo

Mayon‐White 1956

Mean = 2.11, n=9

Mean = 1.75, n=6

LA tolterodine +desmo vs placebo + desmo

Austin 2008

mean = 3, n= 18

mean = 5, n=16

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 2 Number of wet nights per week (no SDs).

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 4 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 4 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment.

Study

Drug

Placebo

propantheline bromide vs placebo

Leys 1956

Mean = 4.96, N=33

Mean = 5.33, N=32

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Drugs versus placebo, Outcome 5 Number of wet nights per week after treatment stopped (no SDs).

Comparison 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, Outcome 1 Number of wet nights per week.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, Outcome 1 Number of wet nights per week.

Study

Drug 1

Drug 2

furosemide vs imipramine

Moltke 1979

Mean = 5.11, N=41

Mean = 3.43, N=43

triclofos vs ephedrine

GP Research Gp 1970#

Mean = 4.1, N=28

Mean = 4.5, N=27

emepronium vs imipramine

Petersen 1974#

Mean = 4.36, N=61

Mean = 2.4, N=61

emepronium vs imipramine‐N‐oxide

Petersen 1974#

Mean = 4.36, N=61

Mean = 3.24, N=61

indoramin 20 mg vs indoramin 10 mg

Shaffer 1978#

Mean = 5.2, N=14

Mean = 4.99, N=14

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, Outcome 2 Number of wet nights per week (no SDs).

Comparison 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, Outcome 3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, Outcome 3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.

Comparison 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, Outcome 4 Number failing or relapsing after treatment stopped.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Drug ‐ drug comparisons, Outcome 4 Number failing or relapsing after treatment stopped.

Study

Drug

Behavioural method

amphetamine sulphate/ephedrine + atropine vs alarm

Wright 1974

Mean = 4.1, N=8

Mean = 1.7, N=10

Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Drug versus behavioural interventions, Outcome 2 Number of wet nights per week (no SDs).

Comparison 3 Drug versus behavioural interventions, Outcome 3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Drug versus behavioural interventions, Outcome 3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights.

Comparison 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, Outcome 1 Number not achieving 14 dry nights.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, Outcome 1 Number not achieving 14 dry nights.

Comparison 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, Outcome 2 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Combination therapy versus monotherapy, Outcome 2 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment.

Comparison 1. Drugs versus placebo

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of wet nights per week Show forest plot

8

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 phenmetrazine vs placebo

1

20

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

1.00 [‐2.52, 0.52]

1.2 indomethacin suppository vs placebo

2

92

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐3.09 [‐4.23, ‐1.96]

1.3 diclofenac sodium vs placebo

1

40

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐4.21 [‐5.76, ‐2.66]

1.4 diazepam vs placebo

1

50

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐4.87 [‐6.25, ‐3.49]

1.5 ibuprofen vs placebo

1

151

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.40 [‐1.01, 0.21]

1.6 pseudoephedrine vs placebo

1

145

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.10 [‐0.51, 0.71]

1.7 ibuprofen + pseudoephedrine

1

153

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.80 [‐1.48, ‐0.12]

1.8 tolterodine vs placebo

1

39

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.70 [‐2.01, 0.61]

1.9 scopolamine butyl bromide vs placebo

1

28

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐0.20 [‐1.56, 1.16]

2 Number of wet nights per week (no SDs) Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

2.1 amphetamine sulphate/ephedrine + atropine vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.2 furosemide vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.3 meprobamate vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.4 propantheline bromide vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.5 emepronium vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.6 indoramin 20 mg vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.7 indoramin 10 mg vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.8 propantheline vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

2.9 LA tolterodine +desmo vs placebo + desmo

Other data

No numeric data

3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights Show forest plot

21

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 chlorprotixine vs placebo

1

90

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.85, 1.07]

3.2 indomethacin suppository vs placebo

1

38

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.36 [0.16, 0.79]

3.3 diclofenac vs placebo

3

124

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.34, 1.13]

3.4 meprobamate vs placebo

1

67

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.11 [0.92, 1.35]

3.5 hydroxyzine chloride vs placebo

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.83 [0.70, 0.97]

3.6 methylphenidate hydrochloride vs placebo

1

83

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.79 [0.67, 0.94]

3.7 atropine sulphate + ephedrine sulphate vs placebo

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.71, 1.41]

3.8 chlordiazepoxide + amitriptyline vs placebo

1

215

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.95, 1.01]

3.9 piracetam vs placebo

1

32

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.38 [0.91, 2.11]

3.10 propantheline vs placebo

2

226

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.95, 1.05]

3.11 oxybutinin vs placebo

1

39

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.52, 1.24]

3.12 diazepam vs placebo

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.22 [0.11, 0.46]

3.13 propantheline vs placebo

1

15

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.33 [0.15, 11.64]

3.14 atomoxetine vs placebo

1

83

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.81 [0.70, 0.95]

3.15 hychlorthiazide vs placebo

1

64

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.94 [0.84, 1.04]

3.16 LA tolterodine + desmo vs placebo + desmo

1

34

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.70, 1.13]

3.17 mesterolone vs placebo

1

30

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.32 [0.17, 0.62]

3.18 tolterodine vs placebo

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.93, 1.08]

3.19 oxybutynin + alarm vs placebo +alarm

1

55

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.56, 1.65]

3.20 oxybutynin + holding exercises + alarm vs placebo +holding exercises +alarm

1

54

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.58, 1.75]

3.21 New Subgroup

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment Show forest plot

5

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 atropine sulphate + ephedrine sulphate vs placebo

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 chlordiazepoxide + amitriptyline vs placebo

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 oxybutinin vs placebo

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 mesterolone vs placebo

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.5 oxybutynin + alarm vs placebo + alarm

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.6 oxybutynin + holding exercises + alarm vs placebo + holding exercises +_ aalrm

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Number of wet nights per week after treatment stopped (no SDs) Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

5.1 propantheline bromide vs placebo

Other data

No numeric data

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Drugs versus placebo
Comparison 2. Drug ‐ drug comparisons

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of wet nights per week Show forest plot

9

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 meprobamate + hydroxyzine vs imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 ephedrine sulphate vs imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.3 indomethacin suppository vs desmopressin (nasal drops)

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.4 oxybutinin vs pseudoephedrine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.5 oxybutinin vs indomethacin

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.6 oxybutinin vs dicyclomine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.7 pseudoephedrine vs indomethacin

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.8 desmopressin + oxybutynin vs desmopressin

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.9 desmopressin + oxybutynin vs imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.10 oxybutynin vs imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.11 oxybutynin vs oxybutynin + imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.12 oxybutynin + imipramine vs imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.13 tolterodine vs imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.14 scopolamine butyl bromide vs imipramine

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.15 New Subgroup

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Number of wet nights per week (no SDs) Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

2.1 furosemide vs imipramine

Other data

No numeric data

2.2 triclofos vs ephedrine

Other data

No numeric data

2.3 emepronium vs imipramine

Other data

No numeric data

2.4 emepronium vs imipramine‐N‐oxide

Other data

No numeric data

2.5 indoramin 20 mg vs indoramin 10 mg

Other data

No numeric data

3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights Show forest plot

10

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

3.1 meprobamate + hydroxyzine vs imipramine

1

25

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.67 [1.04, 2.69]

3.2 hydroxyzine chloride vs methylphenidate hydrochloride

1

85

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.84, 1.30]

3.3 triclofos vs ephedrine

1

56

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.80, 1.07]

3.4 diclofenac vs desmopressin (nose drops)

1

62

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.94 [1.13, 3.33]

3.5 oxybutinin vs imipramine

2

85

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.98 [0.76, 1.26]

3.6 oxybutinin vs imipramine + oxybutinin

2

100

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.46 [1.06, 2.01]

3.7 propantheline vs propantheline + phenobarbitone

1

150

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.09 [0.96, 1.24]

3.8 oxybutynin + imipramine vs imipramine

1

63

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.50, 0.94]

3.9 tolterodine vs imipramine

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.24 [1.01, 1.53]

3.10 desmopressin + oxybutynin vs imipramine

1

96

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.60 [0.44, 0.80]

3.11 desmopressin + oxybutynin vs desmopressin

1

97

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.82 [0.58, 1.16]

3.12 diclofenac vs imipramine

1

36

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.81, 1.30]

3.13 diclofenac vs diclofenac + imipramine

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.17 [0.92, 1.50]

4 Number failing or relapsing after treatment stopped Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

4.1 meprobamate + hydroxyzine vs imipramine

1

25

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.19 [0.90, 1.59]

4.2 oxybutinin vs imipramine

2

64

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.86 [0.60, 1.24]

4.3 oxybutinin vs imipramine + oxybutinin

2

81

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.01 [1.23, 3.28]

4.4 oxybutynin + imipramine vs imipramine

1

51

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.35 [0.16, 0.77]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. Drug ‐ drug comparisons
Comparison 3. Drug versus behavioural interventions

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of wet nights per week

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2 Number of wet nights per week (no SDs) Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

2.1 amphetamine sulphate/ephedrine + atropine vs alarm

Other data

No numeric data

3 Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights Show forest plot

4

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 amphetamine vs alarm

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 methedrine + alarm vs alarm

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 piracetam vs play + supportive therapy

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 piracetam vs piracetam + play + supportive therapy

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 oxybutynin vs accupressure

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Number of wet nights per week after treatment stopped (no SDs)

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. Drug versus behavioural interventions
Comparison 5. Combination therapy versus monotherapy

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number not achieving 14 dry nights Show forest plot

5

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

1.1 Tolterodine + desmopressin vs Desmopressin

1

34

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.70, 1.13]

1.2 Oxybutynin + desmopressin vs Desmopressin

1

97

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.91 [0.63, 1.31]

1.3 Oxybutynin + Imipramine vs Imipramine

2

101

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.50, 0.92]

1.4 Oxybutynin + Alarm vs Placebo + Alarm

1

55

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.56, 1.65]

1.5 Anticholinergic + desmopressin vs Desmopressin

2

131

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.90 [0.70, 1.16]

2 Number failing or relapsing after end of treatment Show forest plot

3

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

Subtotals only

2.1 Oxybutynin + Imipramine vs Imipramine

2

85

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.31, 0.74]

2.2 Oxybutynin + Alarm vs Placebo + Alarm

1

52

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.44 [0.75, 2.78]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 5. Combination therapy versus monotherapy