Effectiveness of oral pentosan polysulfate in painful bladder syndrome: Is it worth the cost?

Abstract

Introduction: Oral pentosan polysulfate (PPS) is a recommended treatment in painful bladder syndrome (PBS); efficacy and cost-effectiveness of PPS have not been compared against the treatment with anticholinergics. Aim: This pilot study compared the effectiveness of oral PPS and anticholinergics and the cost of treatment for both. Materials and Methods: Thirty consecutive female patients presenting in Urology outpatient clinics were included in the study after obtaining clearance from the research and ethics committee. Twelve patients in each arm A and B completed the course of treatment and follow-up. Patients in each group were comparable symptomatically and epidemiologically. The patients in group A received oral PPS 100 mg three times daily for 3 months, whereas the patients in group B received anticholinergic drugs (oxybutynin chloride 2.5 mg twice daily) for 3 months. Efficacy based on symptom score and quality of life (QoL) scores along with cost-effectiveness was compared between the two groups. Results: In relief of symptoms and improvement in the QoL, there was no statistical difference in the findings of the two groups. The cost of therapy for the two groups was significantly different (P = 0.09). The cost of treatment with PPS was higher by two to three times the cost of treatment in the other groups. Conclusion: PPS does not offer any therapeutic advantage over oxybutynin chloride and is a costlier form of treatment.

Keywords

• oxybutynin chloride
• painful bladder syndrome
• pentosan polysulfate
• quality of life