ArticleCentral European journal of urology2026
Comparison of the efficacy of two different desmopressin formulations in pediatric patients with nocturnal enuresis: a retrospective observational study.
Article in Central European journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Nocturnal enuresis (NE) is a common pediatric disorder that significantly affects the quality of life of both children and their families. Desmopressin, a first-line pharmacological treatment, is available in two oral formulations: traditional tablets and oral lyophilizate (MELT). Clinical observations suggest that in pediatric patients, MELT may be chewed or swallowed prematurely, especially in younger children, potentially compromising its intended sublingual absorption and efficacy. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of desmopressin tablets vs MELT formulations in pediatric patients with monosymptomatic NE (MNE). Material and methods: This retrospective, observational, single-center study included 536 pediatric patients with MNE, treated at the Enuresis Center, Operative Research Unit of Pediatrics, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy. Patients were assigned to two independent treatment cohorts: MELT (n = 393) and tablet (n = 143). Efficacy was evaluated over 12 weeks using a "dry night calendar." Results: A statistically significant difference in efficacy was observed between the two formulations (p = 0.045). In the MELT group, response rates were: non-responders 33.7%, partial responders 43.2%, and full responders 23.2%. In the tablet group, rates were: non-responders 20.8%, partial responders 49%, and full responders 30.2%. Conclusions: Patients treated with the tablet formulation demonstrated a superior overall therapeutic response, with a higher rate of optimal response and a lower incidence of no response compared to the MELT formulation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.