Cochrane · systematic review · CD002117
Tricyclic and related drugs for nocturnal enuresis in children
Caldwell, PHY, Sureshkumar, P, Wong, WCF · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
IncontinenceAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
22
current version
GRADE rated
22
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 15 · 68.2%Low 5 · 22.7%Moderate 2 · 9.1%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Tricyclics versus placebo
Population: children with nocturnal enuresis
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of wet nights per week at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs placebo Tricyclics vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 347 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs placebo Tricyclics vs placebo | RR 0.74 [0.61, 0.9] | 12 studies · 831 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ amitriptyline vs placebo Tricyclics vs placebo | RR 0.83 [0.72, 0.97] | 2 studies · 98 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number of wet nights per week at Tricyclics vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 21 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights or relapsing at Tricyclics vs placebo | RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.03] | 5 studies · 416 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events assessed as reported in paper Tricyclics vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 18 studies · 56 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Tricyclics versus another drug
Population: Children with nocturnal enuresis
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of wet nights per week at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs desmopressin Tricyclics vs another drug | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 300 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Number of wet nights per week at the end of treatment ‐ amitriptyline vs desmopressin Tricyclics vs another drug | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 31 participants | Very low |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs desmopressin Tricyclics vs another drug | RR 0.88 [0.64, 1.2] | 4 studies · 222 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs desmopressin + oxybutynin Tricyclics vs another drug | RR 2.39 [1.35, 4.25] | 1 study · 45 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events assessed as reported in paper Tricyclics vs another drug | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 9 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Tricyclics versus behavioural interventions
Population: children with nocturnal enuresis
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs alarm Tricyclics vs behavioural interventions | RR 4 [1.06, 15.08] | 1 study · 24 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs alarm (Mozes detector) Tricyclics vs behavioural interventions | RR 1.28 [1.07, 1.53] | 2 studies · 184 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs 3 step therapy (reassurance, retention control training + wakening, parental involvement) Tricyclics vs behavioural interventions | RR 1.83 [1.08, 3.12] | 1 study · 72 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine vs 3 step therapy + motivation/counselling + education Tricyclics vs behavioural interventions | RR 3.91 [2.3, 6.66] | 1 study · 132 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights or relapsing at Tricyclics vs behavioural interventions | RR 1.67 [1.03, 2.69] | 1 study · 24 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights or relapsing at Tricyclics vs behavioural interventions | RR 3.56 [2.21, 5.72] | 1 study · 132 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Adverse events assessed as reported in paper Tricyclics vs behavioural interventions | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 4 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Combination therapy involving tricyclics
Population: children with nocturnal enuresis
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Number of wet nights per week at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine + oxybutynin vs imipramine | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 63 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Number of wet nights per week at the end of treatment ‐ Amitriptyline + desmopressin vs amitriptyline | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 28 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Number not achieving 14 consecutive dry nights at the end of treatment ‐ imipramine + oxybutynin vs placebo | RR 0.43 [0.23, 0.78] | 1 study · 47 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events assessed as reported in paper | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 2 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |