Skip to main content

Intradetrusor OnabotulinumtoxinA

Intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox) is an FDA-approved, cystoscopically administered treatment for adults with overactive bladder (OAB) symptoms of urge urinary incontinence, urgency, and frequency at 100 U, or urinary incontinence due to neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) associated with a neurologic condition at 200 U, after inadequate response to or intolerance of anticholinergic medication.[1][2] It is also indicated for NDO in pediatric patients ≥ 5 years old, using a separate weight-based regimen.[1] First reported for urological use by Schurch and colleagues in 2000, it is an established minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract dysfunction.[3] A small 2025 prospective single-center study of 11 analyzable patients reported symptom improvement at two weeks and urodynamic improvement at two months.[10]

For drug-class evidence, see the Botulinum Toxin pharmacology hub. The 2024 AUA/SUFU OAB Guideline groups it with minimally invasive options alongside Sacral Neuromodulation and PTNS.[8]

Mechanism of Action​

OnabotulinumtoxinA exerts a dual efferent and afferent mechanism in the bladder:[4][5][6]

  • Efferent (motor) pathway. Cleaves SNAP-25, a SNARE complex protein, thereby blocking acetylcholine release from peripheral cholinergic terminals, reducing detrusor contractile activity. It also blocks ATP release from purinergic efferent nerves.[4][5]
  • Afferent (sensory) pathway. Reduces urothelial ATP release, decreases expression of capsaicin (TRPV1) and purinergic (P2X3) receptors on suburothelial sensory nerves, and reduces substance P and nerve growth factor levels. These observations support a sensory contribution to clinical benefit.[5][6]
  • Anti-inflammatory effects. Decreases mast cell activation, reduces vascular endothelial growth factor expression, and attenuates neuroinflammation in the bladder wall.[5][7]

These mechanisms help explain increased storage capacity and reduced urgency. Sensory and inflammatory mechanisms are proposed; central desensitization has not been shown in patients.[6]

FDA-Approved Indications and Dosing​

IndicationDoseInjection SitesDilutionReferences
Idiopathic OAB with urge urinary incontinence (adults)100 U20 sites (0.5 mL each)100 U in 10 mL NS[1][8][14][15]
Urinary incontinence due to NDO (adults, e.g., SCI / MS)200 U30 sites (1 mL each)200 U in 30 mL NS[1][11][12]
NDO (pediatric ≥ 5 years)≥34 kg: 200 U; <34 kg: 6 U/kg20 sites, 0.5 mL each10 mL total; use label dilution table[1]

In the adult NDO trial program, 300 U offered no clinically relevant advantage over 200 U.[11] In Ginsberg's trial, among those not catheterizing at baseline, CIC for retention began in 42% with 300 U, 35% with 200 U and 10% with placebo.[11][12][13]

Landmark Clinical Trials​

NDO — Pivotal Phase 3 Trials​

The two trials enrolled 275 (Cruz 2011) and 416 (Ginsberg 2012) participants. Both included SCI and MS; the pooled 310 SCI / 381 MS counts are diagnoses across trials, not separate trial populations:[11][12]

  • OnabotulinumtoxinA 200 U reduced UI episodes by 21.8/week versus 13.2/week for placebo at 6 weeks in Cruz's trial (p < 0.01).[12]
  • A meta-analysis identified six RCTs (1,915 patients); its three-study week-6 urodynamic analyses found that 200 U increased MCC by 141 mL and decreased MDP by about 33 cm H₂O versus placebo (both p < 0.00001).[13]
  • Median time to retreatment request: 256 days (200 U) versus 92 days (placebo).[11]
  • I-QOL scores improved significantly across all domains.[11][12]

OAB — Phase 3 Trial (2013)​

Nitti's 557-patient RCT was one of the OAB trials:[14][15]

  • OnabotulinumtoxinA 100 U reduced daily UI episodes by −2.65 versus −0.87 for placebo (p < 0.001).[15]

ABC — Oral Anticholinergic versus OnabotulinumtoxinA (2012)​

The Pelvic Floor Disorders Network ABC trial randomized 249 women with idiopathic urgency urinary incontinence (five or more episodes per 3 days) to daily oral anticholinergic therapy (solifenacin 5 mg, with possible escalation to 10 mg and a switch to trospium XR 60 mg) plus an intradetrusor saline injection, or one intradetrusor injection of 100 U onabotulinumtoxinA plus oral placebo; 241 had primary-outcome data. Over 6 months:[47]

  • Mean daily UUI episodes fell from a baseline of 5.0 by 3.4 with anticholinergic therapy and 3.3 with onabotulinumtoxinA (p = 0.81).
  • Complete resolution of UUI was reported by 13% versus 27% (p = 0.003).[47]
  • Dry mouth was more common with anticholinergic therapy (46% versus 31%, p = 0.02); catheter use at 2 months (0% versus 5%, p = 0.01) and UTI (13% versus 33%, p < 0.001) were more common with onabotulinumtoxinA.[47]
  • Quality of life improved in both groups without a significant between-group difference.

Injection Technique​

Pre-procedure[8][17][18][19]​

  • Measure post-void residual (PVR); caution if PVR > 100–200 mL.[8]
  • Counsel regarding risk of urinary retention and potential need for clean intermittent catheterization (CIC).
  • Confirm willingness and ability to perform CIC if needed.
  • For patients with SCI at or above T6, record baseline blood pressure and prior autonomic dysreflexia; monitor blood pressure at least every 2 minutes during cystoscopy/injection, drain the bladder and treat dysreflexia if it occurs, and stop the procedure if it cannot be controlled .[52]
  • The label advises stopping antiplatelet therapy at least 3 days before injection and managing anticoagulants appropriately; see the antithrombotic section below for observational data.[1]
  • The US adult-bladder label specifies non-aminoglycoside antibiotic prophylaxis 1–3 days before, on treatment day and 1–3 days afterward; reconcile this with the local antimicrobial protocol. The pediatric NDO label also permits a single preprocedure IV dose for children receiving general anesthesia or conscious sedation; do not apply that alternative to adults.[1]
  • Asymptomatic bacteriuria before injection. In a prospective series of 154 patients with neurogenic detrusor overactivity undergoing 273 treatment cycles without antibiotic prophylaxis, asymptomatic bacteriuria was present before 73% (200/273) of treatments; post-treatment UTI occurred in 5% (9/200) of treatments with bacteriuria versus 7% (5/73) without it, with no association between bacteriuria and treatment-related adverse events (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.23–1.81) or therapy failure.[43] EAU Urological Infections strongly recommends screening and treating asymptomatic bacteriuria before urological procedures breaching the mucosa, whereas EAU Neuro-urology strongly recommends against routine screening or treatment in neurologic lower urinary tract dysfunction.[50][51] Neither chapter specifically addresses intradetrusor injection; use a local, procedure-specific protocol.[43][50][51]
  • Prophylaxis duration and agent. In a retrospective series of 616 injections among adults with spinal cord injury who all used CIC, 11 symptomatic UTIs (1.8%) occurred across three antibiotic-duration protocols; the authors considered one preprocedure dose sufficient, but the population and nonrandomized design limit transfer to idiopathic OAB.[44] A separate retrospective comparison found a lower UTI rate with a 3-day oral fluoroquinolone course than with a single intramuscular cephalosporin dose (20.8% versus 36%, p = 0.04), but confounds antibiotic agent with duration.[45] A 2025 multicenter, nonblinded randomized trial in women with OAB reported two-week UTI rates of 9.2% with oral prophylaxis and 10.9% without prophylaxis (p = 0.75).[49]
  • If a local anesthetic is instilled, the US label advises draining it and irrigating with sterile saline before injection; a six-clinician office-practice report describes leaving lidocaine in place, so keep that variation distinct from labeled technique.[1][17]

Procedure[9][17][18]​

  • Performed via rigid or flexible cystoscope in the office or operating room according to patient, anesthesia and procedural needs.
  • For adult OAB, prepare 100 U in a final 10 mL of preservative-free 0.9% saline.[1] For adult NDO, follow the label’s staged vial-and-syringe dilution to prepare 200 U in a final 30 mL across three 10-mL syringes.[1]
  • Use a cystoscopic injection needle appropriate for detrusor injection. The label specifies an insertion depth of about 2 mm into the detrusor, with injections spaced about 1 cm apart; needle length is not the intended depth.[1][9]
  • Fill the bladder enough for visualization without over-distension, and prime the needle with about 1 mL of solution; finish with about 1 mL of saline so the toxin in the needle is delivered.[1]
  • Inject into the detrusor muscle, distributing across the posterior and lateral bladder walls.
  • Spare the trigone (standard practice in the OAB trials, though some evidence suggests trigonal injection is safe). The AUA/SUFU guideline finds both trigone-sparing and trigone-including techniques effective; a small RCT favored sparing for incontinence at 6 months, with no difference in urgency, nocturia or OABSS.[8][9]
  • The labeled OAB template uses 20 sites.[17] Reduced-site protocols are technique variations discussed in expert consensus.[17]
  • For adult NDO, 30 sites at 1 mL each is the labeled template; pediatric dosing differs as above.[12]
  • Procedure duration: approximately 15 minutes.[18]
  • Per the label, drain the saline used for visualization, observe for at least 30 minutes, and confirm a spontaneous void before discharge in OAB patients.[1]

Post-procedure​

  • Follow-up at 7–14 days to assess for urinary retention, which is highest about 2 weeks after injection.[8][18]
  • If a patient does not improve or worsens, check PVR and urinalysis (culture if positive) before assuming failure. A PVR of about 100-300 mL relative to voided volume may prompt CIC depending on emptying symptoms and UTI.[8]
  • In non-catheterizing patients, reassess PVR as clinically appropriate through 12 weeks.[1]
  • For NDO, consider post-treatment urodynamics to assess bladder pressure. In high-risk neuro-urology patients, EAU strongly recommends regular upper-tract assessment and interval urodynamics.[53]
  • After an adequate OAB response, the AUA/SUFU guideline advises discontinuing oral OAB medication and restarting it if efficacy wanes .[8]

Neither the label nor the AUA/SUFU OAB or NLUTD guidelines give a procedure-specific VTE recommendation. This is a brief office- or OR-based cystoscopic injection without a planned procedural drain; for OAB, the label calls for demonstrating a spontaneous void before leaving the clinic, while NDO patients may already use catheterization.[1] Apply the general risk framework (age, obesity, prior VTE, malignancy, prolonged operation or immobility) on the VTE Prophylaxis page rather than a procedure-specific rule.[1][8][23]

Duration of Effect and Retreatment​

  • Onset of action: 1–2 weeks post-injection.[18]
  • Duration of effect: typically 4–10 months[18]; among 227 four-year NDO completers exposed to 200 or 300 U, median effect was at least 9 months.[16] In 100-U OAB label trials, median eligibility for retreatment was 169 days; the separate 200-U RELAX extension measured time to symptom return in women with idiopathic detrusor overactivity.[1][16][18][20]
  • Retreatment interval: no sooner than 12 weeks; expert consensus recommends scheduling at 6-month intervals with the option to retreat earlier if symptoms return.[17][18]
  • Among 227 NDO patients who completed four years of treatment with 200 or 300 U, urinary incontinence reductions persisted with repeat injections.[16] In a retrospective series of 136 women with detrusor overactivity, the mean time from injection to placement on the waiting list for retreatment was 8.5–10.4 months over the first five cycles, then 5.5 months between the fifth and sixth cycles and 5.25 months between the sixth and seventh; only 19.9% continued beyond five cycles, and four received a seventh treatment.[16][21][22]
  • Across indications, the adult limit is 400 U per 3 months; pediatric total dose should not exceed the lower of 10 U/kg or 340 U per 3 months. Units are formulation-specific.[1]

Efficacy Summary​

ParameterOAB (100 U unless noted)NDO (200 U unless noted)References
UI episode reduction−2.65/day vs −0.87 placebo at week 12−21.8/week vs −13.2 placebo at week 6[12][15]
Complete continence rate22.9% vs 6.5% at week 1243.6–57.4% in each treatment year among 227 four-year completers exposed to 200 or 300 U[15][16]
MCC increaseNot measured in Nitti’s pivotal OAB trial; an 11-patient single-arm series reported median 220 to 238 mL at two months (p = 0.035)+141 mL vs placebo at week 6[10][13][15]
MDP decreaseNot measured in Nitti’s pivotal OAB trial−33 cm H₂O vs placebo at week 6[13][15]
Patient-reported outcome (different instruments)Positive Treatment Benefit Scale response: 60.8% vs 29.2% at week 12I-QOL improved in each treatment year among 227 four-year completers; no long-term placebo comparator[15][16]
Duration / retreatment (different measures)Median 169 days to eligibility for retreatment after 100 U in label trials; a separate 200-U RELAX extension assessed symptom-return durationMedian effect ≥9 months among 227 four-year completers exposed to 200 or 300 U[1][16][20]

Adverse Effects​

The adverse effect profile is primarily localized to the lower urinary tract:[13][14][19][23]

Common

  • Urinary tract infection: in pooled OAB label trials, 18% versus 6% placebo within 12 weeks; definitions and follow-up differ across studies.[1] For adult NDO, the label reports UTI in 24% versus 17% within 12 weeks at 200 U and in 49% after the initial injection before re-injection or study exit (median exposure 44 weeks).[1] In NDO, the cited meta-analysis reported RR 1.47 (95% CI 1.29–1.67) versus placebo.[13][14][24] The NDO pivotal trials largely defined "UTI" adverse events by positive urine culture rather than symptoms.[11][12] The Nitti OAB pivotal trial likewise counted bacteriuria plus leukocyturia as UTI regardless of symptoms.[15]
  • Urinary retention or CIC: pooled OAB trials: 6.5% initiated CIC versus 0.4% placebo over the treatment cycle (median catheterization 63 days).[1] Retention was more frequent with diabetes (12.3% versus 6.3% without), as was UTI (31% versus 26%).[1] In studies of adults with idiopathic OAB receiving intravesical botulinum toxin, reported retention rates ranged from 0% to approximately 42%; definitions (PVR threshold, inability to void, CIC start) varied and were often omitted.[40] NDO risk depends on baseline catheterization and dose. In pooled adult NDO label trials, 33/108 (30.6%) patients not using CIC at baseline initiated it after 200 U versus 7/104 (6.7%) on placebo; among the 33 who initiated CIC after 200 U, median catheterization duration was 289 days.[1][3][11][12][13][14]
  • Dysuria: common in OAB patients; 9% versus 7% placebo within 12 weeks in the pooled OAB label trials.[1][14]
  • Hematuria: In adult NDO trials, the meta-analysis reported RR 1.70 (95% CI 1.01–2.85) versus placebo.[13]

Less Common

  • Muscle weakness: RR 2.59 (95% CI 1.36–4.91) in the cited NDO meta-analysis.[13] The product carries a boxed warning that distant toxin spread can cause life-threatening swallowing or breathing difficulty; counsel patients to seek prompt care for these symptoms. Review baseline neuromuscular and respiratory disease: the label warns of heightened risk in these patients, and in a small NDO trial of people with cervical SCI or MS and restrictive lung disease, forced vital capacity fell at least 15% at week 6 in 2/13 after 200 U versus 0/12 after placebo.[1]
  • Transient body weakness.[19]
  • Autonomic dysreflexia in NDO: Injection can precipitate an episode requiring prompt treatment; adult NDO trials reported 1.5% after 200 U versus 0.4% with placebo.[1]

Male-Specific Considerations

In a descriptive post hoc pool of four randomized trials in patients with OAB and urinary incontinence, 194 men were assigned to onabotulinumtoxinA 100 U (n = 98) or placebo (n = 96).[54] At week 12, mean daily UI episodes fell by 2.2 versus 1.3; male subgroup differences were not statistically tested.[54] CIC-defined retention within 12 weeks occurred in 5/96 (5.2%) treated men versus 4/94 (4.3%) placebo recipients in the safety population.[54] In a separate retrospective cohort of 146 men, 91 (62.3%) reported response and 19 (13%) had urinary retention; a higher bladder outlet obstruction index was associated with lower response and more complications.[25]

Comparison with Other Minimally Invasive Therapies​

The 2024 AUA/SUFU guideline says clinicians should offer SNM, PTNS, and/or intradetrusor BTX after inadequate response to or intolerable side effects from behavioral therapy or pharmacotherapy .[8] It also permits minimally invasive therapy without preceding treatment trials through shared decision-making .[8] The FDA-labeled OAB indication still specifies inadequate response to or intolerance of an anticholinergic; distinguish guideline options from product labeling and coverage requirements.[8][18][26][1]

The EAU 2026 female LUTS guideline recommends onabotulinumtoxinA 100 U for OAB/UUI refractory to conservative or drug treatment . It advises warning patients about limited duration of response, UTI and possible prolonged intermittent catheterization , offering repeat injection when effective , and notes that other doses and other botulinum toxin A products are not licensed for OAB in Europe. It finds no difference between suburothelial and intradetrusor injection (level 1a), and higher voiding dysfunction and UTI rates than with antimuscarinics.[41]

ROSETTA is the direct comparison with SNM. It randomized 386 women with refractory UUI; the published abstract describes 381 in its two assigned-treatment groups (192 Botox, 189 SNM), and 364 were available for primary analysis. It used 200 U, above the labeled idiopathic OAB dose.[38]

Six-month outcomeOnabotulinumtoxinA 200 USNM
Mean daily UUI reduction3.9 episodes3.3 episodes
Complete resolution, exploratory diary endpoint35/178 (20%)6/166 (4%)
UTI over six months35%11%

The primary between-group difference was 0.63 episode/day (95% CI 0.13–1.14): statistically significant, with uncertain clinical importance.[38] The complete-resolution analysis required at least four monthly diaries and was exploratory. In the two-year ROSETTA extension, mean daily UUI reductions among initial treatment responders (outcome data for 260/298) were similar with onabotulinumtoxinA 200 U and SNM (−3.88 versus −3.50 episodes/day, p=0.15).[48] In the two-year ROSETTA analysis, among women without recurrent UTI at baseline, recurrent UTI occurred in 40/167 (24%) initially treated with onabotulinumtoxinA 200 U versus 16/154 (10.4%) assigned to SNM.[8][38][48]

Systematic and network reviews pool different doses, populations, follow-up periods and outcome definitions, limiting rankings of BTX, SNM and PTNS.[27][28]

Mixed incontinence — MUSA​

MUSA (JAMA 2025) randomized 150 women with bothersome stress and urgency incontinence despite conservative or medical treatment; 137 contributed to the primary analysis. At six months, UDI total-score change was −66.8 with onabotulinumtoxinA 100 U versus −84.9 with midurethral sling (difference 18.1; 95% CI −4.6 to 40.7; p = 0.12). The sling produced greater improvement in the stress subscore (−45.2 versus −25.1), with similar irritative-subscore change. By 12 months, 22.6% had received both treatments. Discuss the likelihood of treating both symptom components and the different procedural risks.[39]

Off-Label / Emerging Indications​

Interstitial Cystitis / Bladder Pain Syndrome​

The AUA guideline lists intradetrusor onabotulinumtoxinA as a treatment option for IC/BPS when other treatments have failed, though evidence is Grade C.[30] A meta-analysis of 12 RCTs demonstrated significant improvements in ICSI, ICPI, VAS pain scores, and daytime frequency, with small-to-medium effect sizes.[31] Injection sites vary across studies (trigonal versus lateral or posterior walls), and the true effect is difficult to determine given the dearth of placebo-controlled trials of BTX alone.[30]

Technique for IC/BPS is the deliberate opposite of the trigone-sparing OAB default above: a placebo-controlled trial injected onabotulinumtoxinA 100 U as 10 trigonal injections of 1 mL each, sparing the ureteral orifices, without injecting the body of the bladder, on the rationale of maximizing the sensory effect while reducing the risk of urinary retention.[42] Self-catheterization can be particularly difficult in this population because of pain with catheterization, low bladder capacity and pain with distention, and this should be discussed with the patient before proceeding.

Detrusor Sphincter Dyssynergia (DSD)​

Injection of onabotulinumtoxinA into the external urethral sphincter (not intradetrusor) has been used for SCI patients with DSD, though this remains unlicensed.[4][7][32]

Other Investigational Uses​

  • Dysfunctional voiding (non-neurogenic).[32]
  • Benign prostatic hyperplasia: meta-analyses show no benefit over placebo for LUTS.[32][33]
  • CP/CPPS: intraprostatic injection remains investigational; AUA 2025 found the evidence too weak to recommend its use, in an ungraded Future Directions discussion.[32][46]
  • Novel delivery systems including liposome-encapsulated and hydrogel intravesical instillation are under investigation as less invasive alternatives to cystoscopic injection.[32]

Contraindications and Special Populations​

The 2021 AUA/SUFU NLUTD guideline recommends onabotulinumtoxinA for spinal cord injury or multiple sclerosis refractory to oral medications and allows it for other NLUTD patients refractory to oral medications . Clinicians must discuss the risk of urinary retention and the possible need for intermittent catheterization with patients who void spontaneously before choosing toxin . Adult NLUTD care also requires attention to storage pressures, upper-tract risk and reliable emptying; see the NLUTD guideline.[23]

Absolute Contraindications[1][18][19]​

  • Active UTI at time of injection or infection at a proposed injection site.[1]
  • Urinary retention or PVR >200 mL without routine CIC.[1]
  • Known hypersensitivity to botulinum toxin or its components.

Relative Contraindications​

  • Elevated baseline PVR (above 100–200 mL): the AUA/SUFU guideline advises caution before injection because RCTs in its evidence base excluded patients in this range; interpret PVR with voided volumes and voiding symptoms.[8]
  • A workable catheterization plan is required if retention develops; resolve inability or unwillingness before treatment.[1]
  • Impaired bladder emptying.[30]
  • Recurrent UTI: OAB trials excluded patients with more than two UTIs in the preceding six months or chronic antibiotics for recurrent UTI. In these patients, the label advises injection only when likely benefit outweighs the potential UTI risk.[1]

Anticoagulation / Antiplatelet Therapy​

Two retrospective studies included about 1,170 injection episodes, but only a subset of the Danish cohort received antithrombotics. In 400 Danish women undergoing 1,059 treatments, no hematuria was recorded; 111 women were taking antithrombotics at their first treatment.[34] In a mixed-sex cohort receiving treatment-dose antithrombotics, 1 of 114 injections (0.88%) caused hematuria requiring overnight admission and temporary catheterization before resolving.[35] These observational cohorts reported low bleeding rates; the label advises stopping antiplatelets at least 3 days beforehand.[1] Individualize the plan with the prescriber and procedural protocol.[34][35]

Pregnancy​

A 29-year pharmacovigilance analysis identified 913 reported pregnancies across indications; the 0.7% major-defect estimate came from 1/152 prospectively reported live births, not all 913 reports.[36] Among 318 pregnancies with known exposure timing, 94.6% occurred before conception or during the first trimester.[36] Data remain limited, however, and onabotulinumtoxinA is not formally recommended during pregnancy.[36][37]

Practical Pearls​

  • Office-based procedure is preferred over hospital / surgery center for OAB injections.[17]
  • Staff involvement from scheduling through post-procedure follow-up optimizes patient experience and retreatment compliance.[17]
  • Patients should be counseled that the procedure is temporary and requires repeat treatments; setting expectations early improves long-term adherence.[17]
  • It is reasonable to bypass antimuscarinics and proceed directly to BTX in patients who cannot take or do not wish to try oral medications.[8]
  • For NDO patients already performing CIC, the risk of urinary retention is less clinically significant.[11]
  • In a New York observational cohort of 2,680 patients with OAB, reported health-care utilization costs for onabotulinumtoxinA versus sacral neuromodulation were $2,896 versus $15,343 at one year and $3,454 versus $16,189 at three years.[29]

Podcasts​

Botulinum toxin injection templates for overactive bladder: why and when?
ICS Podcast, Ep. 101 (2026)
ics.org
SUFU 21: The Impact of Technique on Outcomes for Botulinum Toxin Injection
SUFU Podcast (2021)
podcasts.apple.com

Videos​

Intradetrusor OnabotulinumtoxinA Injection Technique
SUFU (2025)

References​

1. AbbVie. BOTOX (onabotulinumtoxinA): US prescribing information. Current manufacturer label. Revised 11/2023; current Allergan label on DailyMed (SPL published August 2026) checked September 27, 2026.

2. Nitti V, Haag-Molkenteller C, Kennelly M, et al. "Treatment of Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity and Overactive Bladder With Botox (onabotulinumtoxinA): Development, Insights, and Impact." Medicine. 2023;102(S1):e32377. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000032377

3. Panicker JN, Fowler CJ, Kessler TM. "Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction in the Neurological Patient: Clinical Assessment and Management." Lancet Neurol. 2015;14(7):720–732. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00070-8

4. Lin YH, Chiang BJ, Liao CH. "Mechanism of Action of Botulinum Toxin A in Treatment of Functional Urological Disorders." Toxins. 2020;12(2):E129. doi:10.3390/toxins12020129

5. Jhang JF, Kuo HC. "Botulinum Toxin A and Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction: Pathophysiology and Mechanisms of Action." Toxins. 2016;8(4):120. doi:10.3390/toxins8040120

6. Apostolidis A, Dasgupta P, Fowler CJ. "Proposed Mechanism for the Efficacy of Injected Botulinum Toxin in the Treatment of Human Detrusor Overactivity." Eur Urol. 2006;49(4):644–650. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2005.12.010

7. Kuo HC. "Clinical Application of Botulinum Neurotoxin in Lower-Urinary-Tract Diseases and Dysfunctions: Where Are We Now and What More Can We Do?" Toxins. 2022;14(7):498. doi:10.3390/toxins14070498

8. Cameron AP, Chung DE, Dielubanza EJ, et al. "The AUA/SUFU Guideline on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Idiopathic Overactive Bladder." J Urol. 2024;212(1):11–20. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000003985

9. Karsenty G, Baverstock R, Carlson K, et al. "Technical Aspects of Botulinum Toxin Type A Injection in the Bladder to Treat Urinary Incontinence: Reviewing the Procedure." Int J Clin Pract. 2014;68(6):731–742. doi:10.1111/ijcp.12360

10. Nakai C, Miwa K, Kitagawa Y, et al. "The Efficacy of Intradetrusor Onabotulinumtoxin A Injection for Refractory Overactive Bladder Syndrome — a Single-Center Prospective Study." J Clin Med. 2025;14(12):4151. doi:10.3390/jcm14124151

11. Ginsberg D, Gousse A, Keppenne V, et al. "Phase 3 Efficacy and Tolerability Study of OnabotulinumtoxinA for Urinary Incontinence From Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity." J Urol. 2012;187(6):2131–2139. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.01.125

12. Cruz F, Herschorn S, Aliotta P, et al. "Efficacy and Safety of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Patients With Urinary Incontinence Due to Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity: A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial." Eur Urol. 2011;60(4):742–750. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2011.07.002

13. Cheng T, Shuang WB, Jia DD, et al. "Efficacy and Safety of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Patients With Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials." PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0159307. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159307

14. Nitti VW, Dmochowski R, Herschorn S, et al. "OnabotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Patients With Overactive Bladder and Urinary Incontinence: Results of a Phase 3, Randomized, Placebo Controlled Trial." J Urol. 2017;197(2S):S216–S223. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2016.10.109

15. Nitti VW, Dmochowski R, Herschorn S, et al. "OnabotulinumtoxinA for the Treatment of Patients With Overactive Bladder and Urinary Incontinence: Results of a Phase 3, Randomized, Placebo Controlled Trial." J Urol. 2013;189(6):2186–2193. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.12.022

16. Rovner E, Kohan A, Chartier-Kastler E, et al. "Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Patients With Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity Who Completed 4 Years of Treatment." J Urol. 2016;196(3):801–808. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2016.04.046

17. Eilber KS, Brucker BM, Pezzella A, et al. "Expert Opinions on Best Practices for Overactive Bladder Management With OnabotulinumtoxinA." Toxins. 2025;17(4):207. doi:10.3390/toxins17040207

18. Rovner E. "Chapter 6: Practical Aspects of Administration of OnabotulinumtoxinA." Neurourol Urodyn. 2014;33(Suppl 3):S32–S37. doi:10.1002/nau.22637

19. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. "Committee Opinion No. 604: OnabotulinumtoxinA and the Bladder." Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1408–1411. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000450760.42077.a1

20. Owen RK, Abrams KR, Mayne C, Slack M, Tincello DG. "Comparison of the Effectiveness of Repeated Injections of Onabotulinum Toxin A for Refractory Idiopathic Detrusor Overactivity: Analysis of an Open Label Extension of a Randomized Trial (The RELAX Study)." Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(4):1201–1207. doi:10.1002/nau.23095

21. Duthie JB, Vincent M, Herbison GP, Wilson DI, Wilson D. "Botulinum Toxin Injections for Adults With Overactive Bladder Syndrome." Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(12):CD005493. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005493.pub3

22. Chohan N, Hilton P, Brown K, Dixon L. "Efficacy and Duration of Response to Botulinum Neurotoxin A (OnabotulinumA) as a Treatment for Detrusor Overactivity in Women." Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(11):1605–1612. doi:10.1007/s00192-015-2751-4

23. Ginsberg DA, Boone TB, Cameron AP, et al. "The AUA/SUFU Guideline on Adult Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction: Treatment and Follow-Up." J Urol. 2021;206(5):1106–1113. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000002239

24. Wang CC, Chou EC, Chuang YC, et al. "Effectiveness and Safety of Intradetrusor OnabotulinumtoxinA Injection for Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity and Overactive Bladder Patients in Taiwan — a Phase IV Prospective, Interventional, Multiple-Center Study (Restore Study)." Toxins. 2021;13(12):911. doi:10.3390/toxins13120911

25. Mateu Arrom L, Mayordomo Ferrer O, Sabiote Rubio L, et al. "Treatment Response and Complications After Intradetrusor OnabotulinumtoxinA Injection in Male Patients With Idiopathic Overactive Bladder Syndrome." J Urol. 2020;203(2):392–397. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000000525

26. Farag F, Sakalis VI, Arteaga SM, et al. "What Are the Short-Term Benefits and Potential Harms of Therapeutic Modalities for the Management of Overactive Bladder Syndrome in Women? A Review of Evidence Under the Auspices of the European Association of Urology, Female Non-Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Guidelines Panel." Eur Urol. 2023;84(3):302–312. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2023.05.014

27. Roman MP, Ciortea R, Doumouchtsis SK, et al. "Comparison of Different Treatment Outcomes for Refractory Overactive Bladder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis." Toxins. 2025;17(10):479. doi:10.3390/toxins17100479

28. Lo CW, Wu MY, Yang SS, Jaw FS, Chang SJ. "Comparing the Efficacy of OnabotulinumtoxinA, Sacral Neuromodulation, and Peripheral Tibial Nerve Stimulation as Third Line Treatment for the Management of Overactive Bladder Symptoms in Adults: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis." Toxins. 2020;12(2):E128. doi:10.3390/toxins12020128

29. Chughtai B, Clemens JQ, Thomas D, et al. "Real World Performance of Sacral Neuromodulation and OnabotulinumtoxinA for Overactive Bladder: Focus on Safety and Cost." J Urol. 2020;203(1):179–184. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000000462

30. Clemens JQ, Erickson DR, Varela NP, Lai HH. "Diagnosis and Treatment of Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome." J Urol. 2022;208(1):34–42. doi:10.1097/JU.0000000000002756

31. Giannantoni A, Gubbiotti M, Bini V. "Botulinum Neurotoxin A Intravesical Injections in Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Painful Syndrome: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis." Toxins. 2019;11(9):E510. doi:10.3390/toxins11090510

32. Jhang JF, Kuo HC. "Novel Applications of OnabotulinumtoxinA in Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction." Toxins. 2018;10(7):E260. doi:10.3390/toxins10070260

33. da Silva CM, Chancellor MB, Smith CP, Cruz F. "Use of Botulinum Toxin for Genitourinary Conditions: What Is the Evidence?" Toxicon. 2015;107(Pt A):141–147. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2015.07.333

34. El Issaoui M, Elissaoui S, Elmelund M, Klarskov N. "Bleeding Risk in Female Patients Undergoing Intravesical Injection of OnabotulinumtoxinA for Overactive Bladder: A Danish Retrospective Cohort Study." Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(10):2581–2585. doi:10.1007/s00192-023-05579-1

35. Mensah EE, Toia B, Nguyen L, et al. "Intravesical OnabotulinumtoxinA Injections in Patients on Antiplatelet and Anticoagulation Therapy." Neurourol Urodyn. 2021;40(7):1829–1833. doi:10.1002/nau.24758

36. Brin MF, Kirby RS, Slavotinek A, et al. "Pregnancy Outcomes in Patients Exposed to OnabotulinumtoxinA Treatment: A Cumulative 29-Year Safety Update." Neurology. 2023;101(2):e103–e113. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000207375

37. Gulati K, Wagle Shukla A, Pandey S. "Is the Use of Botulinum Toxin Injection for Treating Neurological Disorders Safe During Pregnancy and Lactation?" Toxicon. 2025;266:108546. doi:10.1016/j.toxicon.2025.108546

38. Amundsen CL, Richter HE, Menefee SA, et al. "OnabotulinumtoxinA vs Sacral Neuromodulation on Refractory Urgency Urinary Incontinence in Women: A Randomized Clinical Trial." JAMA. 2016;316(13):1366–1374. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.14617. Full text.

39. Harvie HS, Menefee SA, Richter HE, et al. "Midurethral Sling vs OnabotulinumtoxinA in Females With Urinary Incontinence: The MUSA Randomized Clinical Trial." JAMA. 2025;333(21):1887–1896. doi:10.1001/jama.2025.4682.

40. Stavrou S, Paynter JA, Carins T, et al. "Variation in the Definitions of Urinary Retention in Studies of Intravesical Botulinum Toxin for Idiopathic Overactive Bladder: A Narrative Systematic Review." Neurourol Urodyn. 2025;44(4):860–877. doi:10.1002/nau.70017

41. European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines on Management of Non-Neurogenic Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) (2026 reprint of the 2025 guideline). Guideline.

42. Pinto RA, Costa D, Morgado A, et al. "Intratrigonal OnabotulinumtoxinA Improves Bladder Symptoms and Quality of Life in Patients with Bladder Pain Syndrome/Interstitial Cystitis: A Pilot, Single Center, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial." J Urol. 2018;199(4):998–1003. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2017.10.018

43. Leitner L, Sammer U, Walter M, et al. "Antibiotic Prophylaxis May Not Be Necessary in Patients With Asymptomatic Bacteriuria Undergoing Intradetrusor OnabotulinumtoxinA Injections for Neurogenic Detrusor Overactivity." Sci Rep. 2016;6:33197. doi:10.1038/srep33197

44. Paradella AC, Musegante AF, Brites C. "Comparison of Different Antibiotic Protocols for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Patients With Neurogenic Bladder Treated With Botulinum Toxin A." Braz J Infect Dis. 2016;20(6):623–626. doi:10.1016/j.bjid.2016.08.012

45. Houman J, Moradzadeh A, Patel DN, et al. "What Is the Ideal Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Intravesically Administered Botox Injection? A Comparison of Two Different Regimens." Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(5):701–704. doi:10.1007/s00192-018-3721-4

46. American Urological Association. Diagnosis and Management of Male Chronic Pelvic Pain (Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome and Chronic Scrotal Content Pain): AUA Guideline (2025). Approved March 2025. Full 2025 guideline Future Directions, p43.

47. Visco AG, Brubaker L, Richter HE, Nygaard I, Paraiso MFR, Menefee SA, et al. "Anticholinergic therapy vs. onabotulinumtoxinA for urgency urinary incontinence." N Engl J Med. 2012;367(19):1803-1813. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1208872

48. Amundsen CL, Komesu YM, Chermansky C, et al. "Two-Year Outcomes of Sacral Neuromodulation Versus OnabotulinumtoxinA for Refractory Urgency Urinary Incontinence: A Randomized Trial." Eur Urol. 2018;74(1):66–73. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2018.02.011

49. Holubyeva A, Khin K, Gao T, et al. "Onabotulinum Toxin A-Led Urinary Tract Infections—Should we Safeguard? A Randomized Controlled Trial." Int Urogynecol J. 2025;36(2):469–474. doi:10.1007/s00192-024-06028-3

50. European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines on Urological Infections. 2026, §3.3.7. Guideline.

51. European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines on Neuro-urology. 2026, §3.5.4. Guideline.

52. Krassioukov A, Linsenmeyer TA, Beck LA, et al. "Evaluation and Management of Autonomic Dysreflexia and Other Autonomic Dysfunctions: Preventing the Highs and Lows: Management of Blood Pressure, Sweating, and Temperature Dysfunction." J Spinal Cord Med. 2021;44(4):631–683. doi:10.1080/10790268.2021.1925058

53. European Association of Urology. EAU Guidelines on Neuro-urology. 2026, §§3.4.2.e.6 and 3.7. Guideline.

54. Nitti VW, Kohan A, McCammon K, et al. "Efficacy and safety of onabotulinumtoxinA for the treatment of overactive bladder in men and women: A pooled analysis." Neurourol Urodyn. 2024;43(8):1765–1775. doi:10.1002/nau.25538