Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of low-intensity shockwave therapy on lower urinary tract symptoms in non-prostatic condition: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Holy Sarah Gita Sinaga, Helda, H. Rahardjo, Gideon Hot Partogi Sinaga

Arab Journal of Urology, 2025

624 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-intensity shockwave therapy (LiSWT) for non-prostatic storage lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), including overactive bladder (OAB), stress urinary incontinence (SUI), and interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS). Methods A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted up to September 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective studies, and single-arm studies evaluating LiSWT for non-prostatic LUTS in adults were included. Outcomes assessed included urinary frequency, urgency, nocturia, pain for IC/BPS, pad-test for SUI, uroflowmetry parameters, and questionnaire-based symptom scores. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and ROBINS-I. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Results Twelve studies (six RCTs, six observational) involving 624 participants were included. LiSWT significantly reduced urinary frequency in OAB and IC/BPS patients, with SUI improvements emerging at 12 weeks. Compared to sham treatment, only the OAB group showed significant reductions at 4 weeks. Urgency symptoms improved in OAB and SUI, but differences from sham were not significant. Nocturia improved in OAB and IC/BPS but was not significantly different from sham. Overall pain reduction was significant for IC/BPS (MD −1.61 (95%CI −2.21 to −1.02)). In SUI, most participants had >50% improvement in pad-test weight, but the mean difference compared to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 624 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free