Clinical comparision of intravesical hyaluronic acid and hyaluronic acid-chondroitin sulphate therapy for patients with bladder pain syndrome/interstitital cystitis.

Omer Gülpınar, Aytaç Kayış, Evren Süer, Mehmet İlker Gökçe, Adil Güçal Güçlü, Nihat Arıkan
Author Information
  1. Omer Gülpınar: Department of Urology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
  2. Aytaç Kayış: Department of Urology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
  3. Evren Süer: Department of Urology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
  4. Mehmet İlker Gökçe: Department of Urology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
  5. Adil Güçal Güçlü: Department of Urology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
  6. Nihat Arıkan: Department of Urology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: patients with a history of bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis (BPS/IC) and who responded poorly or unsatisfactorily with previous treatment were compared taking intravesical hyaluronic acid (HA) or hyaluronic acid-chondroitin sulphate (HA-CS).
METHODS: patients were treated with intravesical instillation with 50 mL sterile sodium hyalurinic acid (Hyacyst, Syner-Med, Surrey, UK) (n = 32) and sodium hyaluronate 1.6% sodium chondroitin sulphate 2% (Ialuril, Aspire Pharma, UK) (n = 33). Intravesical instillations were performed weekly in first month, every 15 days in the second month and monthly in third and fourth months, for a total of 8 doses. patients were evaluated using a visual analog pain scale (VAS), interstitial cystitis symptom index (ICSI), interstitial cystitis problem index (ICPI), voiding diary for frequency/nocturia, cystometric bladder capacity and voided volume at the beginning and at 6 months. All patients had a potassium sensitivity test (PST) initially. Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: In total, 53 patients met the study criteria. There were 30 patients in the HA-CS group (mean age: 48.47) and 23 patients in the HA group (mean age: 49.61) (p > 0.05). The initial PST was positive in 71.7% patients (38/53) overall with no difference between groups (p > 0.05). Responses for VAS, ICCS, ICPS, 24-hour frequency/nocturia statistically improved in both groups at 6 months. There was no significant difference in symptomatic improvement (p > 0.05). Eight patients had mild adverse events.
CONCLUSION: HA and HA/CS instillation can be effective in BPS/IC patients who do not respond to conservative treatment. An important limitation of our study is that the HA dosage of the 2 treatment arms were different. It would be more appropriate with same HA dosage in both groups; however, there was no commercially available glycosaminoglycan (GAG) substance with same HA dosage for single and combination therapy. Large, long-term randomized studies are required to determine if there is a difference between these treatments.

References

  1. Int Urogynecol J. 2011 Apr;22(4):401-5 [PMID: 20938644]
  2. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Mar;45(1):259-72 [PMID: 11862078]
  3. Can J Urol. 2002 Feb;9(1):1454-8 [PMID: 11886599]
  4. BJU Int. 2011 Feb;107(3):370-5 [PMID: 21176078]
  5. J Urol. 2013 Jan;189(1):336-42 [PMID: 23174248]
  6. J Urol. 1996 Jul;156(1):45-8 [PMID: 8648835]
  7. Nat Clin Pract Urol. 2004 Dec;1(2):85-9 [PMID: 16474520]
  8. Eur Urol. 2010 Jan;57(1):35-48 [PMID: 19733958]
  9. J Urol. 2007 Apr;177(4):1390-4 [PMID: 17382739]
  10. Eur Urol. 2008 Jan;53(1):60-7 [PMID: 17900797]
  11. J Urol. 1999 Feb;161(2):553-7 [PMID: 9915447]
  12. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2005;39(2):143-7 [PMID: 16032779]
  13. J Urol. 2008 Feb;179(2):764-9 [PMID: 18082196]
  14. Int Urogynecol J. 2012 Sep;23(9):1193-9 [PMID: 21904840]
  15. BJU Int. 2009 Jan;103(1):56-60 [PMID: 18778342]
  16. Urology. 2012 Feb;79(2):483.e13-7 [PMID: 22137543]
  17. Urology. 2010 Oct;76(4):804-9 [PMID: 20494413]
  18. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2008 May;19(5):717-21 [PMID: 18097627]
  19. World J Urol. 1994;12(1):3-10 [PMID: 8012413]
  20. BJU Int. 2005 Nov;96(7):1063-6 [PMID: 16225529]
  21. J Urol. 2004 Apr;171(4):1554-8 [PMID: 15017219]
  22. Int Urogynecol J. 2012 Sep;23(9):1187-92 [PMID: 22569687]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0patientsHAcystitishyaluronicPatientsbladderpaintreatmentintravesicalacidsulphatesodiummonthsp>005differencegroupsdosageBPS/ICacid-chondroitinHA-CSinstillationUKn=monthtotalVASinterstitialindexfrequency/nocturia6PSTstudygroupmeanage:therapyINTRODUCTION:historysyndrome/interstitialrespondedpoorlyunsatisfactorilypreviouscomparedtakingMETHODS:treated50mLsterilehyalurinicHyacystSyner-MedSurrey32hyaluronate16%chondroitin2%IalurilAspirePharma33Intravesicalinstillationsperformedweeklyfirstevery15dayssecondmonthlythirdfourth8dosesevaluatedusingvisualanalogscalesymptomICSIproblemICPIvoidingdiarycystometriccapacityvoidedvolumebeginningpotassiumsensitivitytestinitiallyWilcoxonMann-WhitneyUtestsusedstatisticalanalysisRESULTS:53metcriteria304847234961initialpositive717%38/53overallResponsesICCSICPS24-hourstatisticallyimprovedsignificantsymptomaticimprovementEightmildadverseeventsCONCLUSION:HA/CScaneffectiverespondconservativeimportantlimitation2armsdifferentappropriatehowevercommerciallyavailableglycosaminoglycanGAGsubstancesinglecombinationLargelong-termrandomizedstudiesrequireddeterminetreatmentsClinicalcomparisionsyndrome/interstitital

Similar Articles

Cited By (14)