There was not enough evidence to judge whether or not the included drugs cured bedwetting when used alone. There was limited evidence to suggest that desmopressin, imipramine and enuresis alarms therapy were better than the included drugs to which they were compared. In other reviews, desmopressin, tricyclics and alarm interventions have been shown to be effective during treatment. There was also evidence to suggest that combination therapy with anticholinergic therapy increased the efficacy of other established therapies such as imipramine, desmopressin and enuresis alarms by reducing the relapse rates, by about 20%, although it was not possible to identify the characteristics of children who would benefit from combination therapy. Future studies should evaluate the role of combination therapy against established treatments in rigorous and adequately powered trials.
A randomized, placebo-controlled, exploratory trial of Ibuprofen and pseudoephedrine in the treatment of primary nocturnal enuresis in children.
This exploratory randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial of 14 days duration conducted in 22 primary care practices in the United States was used to compare the efficacy of ibuprofen and pseudoephedrine, administered alone or in combination, to placebo for the treatment of primary nocturnal enuresis (PNE) in children aged 6 to 11 years. Ibuprofen (IBU) and pseudoephedrine (PSE) are not approved for the treatment of PNE. Three hundred eighteen children with PNE were enrolled. Eligible children had >or= 8 wet nights during a 14-day baseline. Each child was randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatment groups: IBU 12.5 mg/kg and PSE HCl 15 or 30 mg (depending on weight) (n = 82), IBU 12.5 mg/kg (n = 78), PSE HCl 15 or 30 mg (n = 76), or placebo (n = 82). Treatment was administered orally at bedtime for 14 days. Caregivers recorded whether the child was wet or dry each night in a daily diary. Children in the IBU alone and IBU and PSE combined groups had greater mean reductions from baseline in the number of wet nights (primary end point) compared to children receiving placebo (-2.9, -2.9, and -1.4, respectively, P < .005); PSE alone (-1.8) was not significantly different from placebo. Children in these groups also had greater mean percentage reductions in the number of wet nights compared to placebo-treated children (26%, 28%, and 12%, respectively). Although not always statistically significant, secondary end points improved in the IBU alone and IBU and PSE combined treatment groups, which included decreases in mean number of wet nights and decreases in the number and percentage of children with >or= 50%, 40%, 30%, or 25% reductions in number of wet nights. Children responding to treatment had larger mean bladder capacities and larger mean percentage of predicted bladder capacities than children who did not respond in each treatment group. No significant differences in adverse events were found among treatment groups. In conclusion, in this exploratory study in children aged 6 through 11 years, IBU provided a beneficial effect in the treatment of PNE compared to placebo, whereas PSE did not. The addition of PSE to IBU did not enhance or diminish the efficacy of IBU. All treatments were well tolerated.