Executive summary: The international consultation on incontinence 2008 - Committee on: "Dynamic testing"; for urinary incontinence and for fecal incontinence. Part 1: Innovations in urodynamic techniques and urodynamic testing for signs and symptoms of urinary incontinence in female patients

Neurourology and Urodynamics

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 140-145

  Rosier, Peter F W M ^a   Gajewski, Jerzy B ^b   Sand, Peter K ^c   Szabó, László ^d   Capewell, Ann ^e   Hosker, Gordon L ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c EVANSTON HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MISKOLC   (Hungary)

^e St Helens Hospital   (United Kingdom)

^f ST MARY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Consensus report; Fecal incontinence; Incontinence (female); Urinary incontinence; Urodynamics

Indexed keywords

CONSULTATION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FECES INCONTINENCE; FRANCE; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NORMAL VALUE; REVIEW; SYMPTOM; URINE INCONTINENCE; URODYNAMICS;

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FECAL INCONTINENCE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; ORGANIZATIONS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; URINARY INCONTINENCE; URODYNAMICS; UROLOGY; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 76049122858     PISSN: 07332467     EISSN: 15206777     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/nau.20764     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Homma Y, Batista JE, Bauer SB, et al. First International Consultation on Incontinence. Recommendations of the International Scientific Committee: The evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence. Plymouth, UK: Health Publication Ltd. 1999. pp 353-99.
2. Homma Y, Batista J, Bauer S, et al. Urodynamics. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A, editors. 2nd International Consultation on Incontinence. Plymouth UK: Plymbridge Distributors, Ltd; 2002. pp 317-72.
3. Griffiths D, Kondo A, Bauer S, et al. Dynamic testing. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A, editors. Incontinence 3rd International Consultation on Incontinence, 21 (Paris). Plymouth, England: Health Publication Ltd; 2005. pp 585-673.
4. Hosker GL, Rosier PFWM, Gajewski GB, Sand PK, Szabó L, Capewell A. Committee 6 on: 'Dynamic Testing', for urinary incontinence and for faecal incontinence. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A, editors. The 4th International Consultation on Incontinence, 2008. Plymouth UK: Health Publication Ltd; 2009. pp 413-522.
5. Abrams PH, Blaivas JG, Stanton SL, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function. The International Continence Society Committee on Standardisation of Terminology. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl 1988;114:5-19.
6. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al. Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: Report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002; 21:167-78.
7. Schäfer W, Abrams P, Liao L, et al. International Continence Society. Good urodynamic practices: Uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies. Neurourol Urodyn 2002;21:261-74.
8. Zehnder P, Roth B, Burkhard FC, Kessler TM. Air charged and microtip catheters cannot be used interchangeably for urethral pressure measurement: A prospective, single-blind, randomized trial. J Urol 2008;180:1013-7.
9. Craggs MD. Objective measurement of bladder sensation: Use of a new patient-activated device and response to neuromodulation. BJU Int 2005;96:29-36.
10. Griffiths CJ, Harding C, Blake C, et al. A nomogram to classify men with lower urinary tract symptoms using urine flow and noninvasive measurement of bladder pressure. J Urol 2005;174:1323-6; discussion 1326; author reply 1326.
11. Clarkson B, Robson W, Griffiths C, et al. Multisite evaluation of noninvasive bladder pressure flow recording using the penile cuff device: Assessment of test-retest agreement. J Urol 2008;180:2515-21.
12. Pel JJ, Bosch JL, Blom JH, et al. Development of a non-invasive strategy to classify bladder outlet obstruction in male patients with LUTS. Neurourol Urodyn 2002;21:117-25.
13. Slack M, Tracey M, Hunsicker K, et al. Urethral retro-resistance pressure: A new clinical measure of urethral function. Neurourol Urodyn 2004;23:656-61.
14. Roderick T, Paul M, Christopher M, et al. Urethral retro-resistance pressure: Association with established measures of incontinence severity and change after midurethral tape insertion. Neurourol Urodyn 2008.
15. Klarskov N, Lose G. Urethral pressure reflectometry; a novel technique for simultaneous recording of pressure and cross-sectional area in the female urethra. Neurourol Urodyn 2007;26:254-61.
16. Klarskov N, Lose G. Urethral pressure reflectometry and pressure profilometry in healthy volunteers and stress urinary incontinent women. Neurourol Urodyn 2008;27:807-12.
17. Kortmann BB, Sonke GS, Wijkstra H, et al. Intra- and inter-investigator variation in the analysis of pressure-flow studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Neurourol Urodyn 2000;19:221-32.
18. Zimmern P, et al. Interrater reliability of filling cystometrogram interpretation in a multicenter study. J Urol 2006;175:2174-7.
19. Ellis-Jones J, Swithinbank L, Abrams P. The impact of formal education and training on urodynamic practice in the United Kingdom: A survey. Neurourol Urodyn 2006;25:406-10.
20. Gupta A, Defreitas G, Lemack GE. The reproducibility of urodynamic findings in healthy female volunteers: Results of repeated studies in the same setting and after short-term follow-up. Neurourol Urodyn 2004;23: 311-6.
21. Wyndaele JJ, De Wachter S. Cystometrical sensory data from a normal population: Comparison of two groups of young healthy volunteers examined with 5 years interval. Eur Urol 2002;42:34-8.
22. Pauwels E, De Wachter S, Wyndaele JJ. Normality of bladder filling, studied in symptom-free middle-aged women. J Urol 2004;171:1567-70.
23. Scaldazza CV, Morosetti C. Effect of different sized transurethral catheters on pressure-flow studies inwomen with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urol Int 2005;75:21-5.
24. Lose G, Griffiths D, Hosker G, et al. Standardisation of urethral pressure measurement: Report from the Standardisation Sub-Committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn 2002;21:258-60.
25. Lowenstein L, Dooley Y, Kenton K, et al. The volume at which women leak first on urodynamic testing is not associated with quality of life, measures of urethral integrity or surgical failure. J Urol 2007;178:193-6.
26. Albo M, Wruck L, Baker J, et al. The relationships among measures of incontinence severity in women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol 2007;177:1810-4.
27. Sinha D, Nallaswamy V, Arunkalaivanan AS. Value of leak point pressure study in women with incontinence. J Urol 2006;176:186-8; discussion 188.
28. Lemack GE. Urodynamic assessment of patients with stress incontinence: How effective are urethral pressure profilometry and abdominal leak point pressures at case selection and predicting outcome? Curr Opin Urol 2004;14:307-11.
29. Rodriguez LV, de Almeida F, Dorey F, et al. Does Valsalva leak point pressure predict outcome after the distal urethral polypropylene sling? Role of urodynamics in the sling era. J Urol 2004;172:210-4.
30. Lemack GE, Zimmern PE. Identifying patients who require urodynamic testing before surgery for stress incontinence based on questionnaire information and surgical history. Urology 2000;55:506-11.
31. Colli E, Artibani W, Goka J, et al. Are urodynamic tests useful tools for the initial conservative management of non-neurogenic urinary incontinence? A review of the literature. Eur Urol 2003;43:63-9.
32. Defreitas GA, Lemack GE, Zimmern PE, et al. Distinguishing neurogenic from non-neurogenic detrusor overactivity: A urodynamic assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms in patients with and without Parkinson's disease. Urology 2003;62:651-5.
33. Miller KL, DuBeau CE, Bergmann M, et al. Quest for a detrusor overactivity index. J Urol 2002;167:578-84; discussion 584-5.
34. Al-Hayek S, Belal M, Abrams P. Does the patient's position influence the detection of detrusor overactivity? Neurourol Urodyn 2008;27:279-86.
35. Geirsson G, Fall M, Lindstrom S. The ice-water test-a simple and valuable supplement to routine cystometry. Br J Urol 1993;71:681-5.
36. Mukerji G, Waters J, Chessell IP, et al. Pain during ice water test distinguishes clinical bladder hypersensitivity from overactivity disorders. BMC Urol 2006;6:31.
37. van Brummen HJ, Heintz AP, van der Vaart CH. The association between overactive bladder symptoms and objective parameters from bladder diary and filling cystometry. Neurourol Urodyn 2004;23:38-42.
38. Lin LY, Yen NH, Lin CY, et al. Comparisons of urodynamic characteristics between female patients with overactive bladder and overactive bladder plus stress urinary incontinence. Urology 2004;64:945-9.
39. Digesu GA, et al. Overactive bladder symptoms: Do we need urodynamics? Neurourol Urodyn 2003;22:105-8.
40. Weber AM, Walters MD. Cost-effectiveness of urodynamic testing before surgery for women with pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;183:1338-46; discussion 1346-7.
41. Martin JL, Williams KS, Abrams KR, et al. Systematic review and evaluation of methods of assessing urinary incontinence. Health Technol Assess 2006;10:1-132, iii-iv.
42. Agur W, Housami F, Drake M, et al. Could the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines on urodynamics in urinary incontinence put some women at risk of a bad outcome from stress incontinence surgery? BJU Int 2009;103:635-9.
43. Romancik M, Lutter I, Goncalves F, et al. Valsalva leak point pressure predicts outcome after transobturator suburethral tape implantation-fact or fiction? Bratisl Lek Listy 2006;107:426-9.
44. Costantini E, Lazzeri M, Giannantoni A, et al. Preoperative Valsava leak point pressure may not predict outcome of mid-urethral slings. Analysis from a randomized controlled trial of retropubic versus transobturator mid-urethral slings. Int Braz J Urol 2008;34:73-81; discussion 81-3.
45. Nager CW, FitzGeraldM, Kraus SR, et al. Urodynamicmeasures do not predict stress continence outcomes after surgery for stress urinary incontinence in selected women. J Urol 2008;179:1470-4.
46. Guerette NL, Bena JF, Davila GW. Transobturator slings for stress incontinence: Using urodynamic parameters to predict outcomes. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2008;19:97-102.
47. Wheeler TL 2nd, Richter HE, Greer WJ, et al. Predictors of success with postoperative voiding trials after a mid urethral sling procedure. J Urol 2008;179:600-4.
48. Shukla A, Paul SK, Nishtar A, et al. Factors predictive of voiding problems following insertion of tension-free vaginal tape. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007;96:122-6.
49. Roovers JP, Oelke M. Clinical relevance of urodynamic investigation tests prior to surgical correction of genital prolapse: A literature review. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2007;18:455-60.
50. Roovers JP, van Laar JO, Loffeld C, et al. Does urodynamic investigation improve outcome in patients undergoing prolapse surgery? Neurourol Urodyn 2007;26:170-5.
51. Malone-Lee J, Henshaw DJ, Cummings K. Urodynamic verification of an overactive bladder is not a prerequisite for antimuscarinic treatment response. BJU Int 2003;92:415-7.