Urodynamic evaluation: can it prevent the need for surgical intervention in women with apparent pure stress urinary incontinence?

European Urogynaecological Association Position Statement: The role of urodynamics in stress urinary incontinence evaluation and treatment decision

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is defined as a condition characterized by the involuntary leakage of urine during activities that increase intra-abdominal pressure which may decrease quality of life with a significant economic impact on health systems, necessitating the implementation of cost-effective management plans. Urodynamics (UDS) has been considered during the last decades as the gold standard for assessment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to their high reproducibility. At the same time, concerns about the systematic use of UDS before SUI surgery were raised due to a limited evidenced base to recommend their routine use. In uncomplicated female patients with SUI, UDS can offer further insights into LUTS, potentially assisting the physician in determining the appropriate therapeutic approach. However, it has not been shown that preoperative UDS can directly impact the surgical outcome for continence. Indeed, evidence supports the conclusion that pre-operative UDS in women with uncomplicated, clinically demonstrable, SUI does not improve the outcome of surgery for SUI. Nevertheless, asymptomatic detrusor overactivity (DO) identified by urodynamic testing or pre-existing voiding dysfunction are associated with an increased occurrence of postoperative overactive bladder (OAB) and voiding dysfunction, respectively. The EUGA Working Group concluded that the evidence does not support the systematic preoperative use of UDS for uncomplicated cases. However, in cases where mixed symptoms, voiding dysfunction, previous surgery, or concomitant prolapse are present, preoperative UDS are advised as they can be beneficial in anticipating postoperative outcomes. This aids in conducting comprehensive and thorough preoperative counseling. The Group recommend performing preoperative UDS considering the patient's specific clinical situation and the surgeon's judgment, with consideration given to the potential benefits, risks, and impact on treatment decisions and patient outcomes.

Significance of 4D US parameters for the clinical treatment of female patients with stress urinary incontinence

Background

Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) that has been associated with abnormal pelvic floor muscle function or morphology is a common condition. This research aimed to study the impact of the four-dimensional (4D) pelvic floor ultrasound on the treatment of female patients with clinical diagnosis of SUI and to evaluate its clinical significance on SUI.

Methods

We enrolled 51 women with SUI. Before transobturator suburethral tape procedures, the patients underwent 4D pelvic floor ultrasonography. The measurements include residual urine volume, bladder detrusor thickness in resting state, the vertical distance from the bladder neck to the posterior inferior edge of pubic symphysis at rest and Valsalva movement, posterior angle of bladder urethra, and urethral rotation angle. The degree of movement of the bladder neck (the difference between the vertical distance from the bladder neck to the posterior inferior edge of the pubic symphysis under the resting state and the maximum Valsalva movement) and the formation of a funnel at the internal orifice of the urethra were calculated.

Results

The mean bladder detrusor thickness was 2.6 ± 0.9 mm, the vertical distance from the bladder neck to the posterior inferior edge of pubic symphysis was 27.7 ± 4.5 mm, the posterior angle of the bladder was 122.7 ± 18.9°, the vertical distance from the rectal ampulla to the posterior inferior edge of pubic symphysis was 18.5 ± 4.6 mm, and the mean area of hiatus of the levator ani muscle was 22.1 ± 6.0 cm2. The mean posterior angle of the bladder on Valsalva was 159.3 ± 23.1°, and the mean urethral rotation angle was 67.2 ± 21.4°.

Conclusions

The 4D pelvic floor ultrasound is a reliable method in evaluating preoperational morphological characteristics of patients with SUI. With the help of the 4D pelvic floor ultrasound, the individualized treatment regimen can be developed and, more importantly, the inappropriate surgical decision can be avoided.

International Survey on Urodynamic Investigations in Women Undergoing Stress Urinary Incontinence Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of invasive urodynamics (UD) in women candidates for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a worldwide survey on current trends in use of preoperative invasive UD in women undergoing SUI surgery. Demographic respondents' data, whether routine invasive UD is performed before surgery and its diagnostic role were investigated.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 504 respondents: urologists 83.1%, gynecologists 16.8%. UD findings were reported influencing the surgical decision in 84.3% of the cases and may change planned surgery in 72.4%, may discourage it in 43.6%, may change surgical expectations in 55.5%, and are useful for preoperative counselling in 96.6%. We found a very low rate of routine performance of UD for uncomplicated SUI. The most impactful UD findings were related to the conditions of detrusor contractility, overactivity and underactivity. Among voiding disorders, dyssynergia was considered the most relevant dysfunction. Valsalva Leak Point Pressure was the most reported tool to investigate urethral function. The surgical management was influenced by UD findings in the vast majority of the cases, although about 60% reported that a relevant impact of the UD occurred in less than 40% of the investigations. The crucial effect of UD on surgical management was high. This finding showed that for many respondents UD still has a pivotal role before SUI surgery.

CONCLUSION

This survey showed a worldwide picture on preoperative UD in SUI surgery highlighting the crucial role of UD. UD investigation influences surgical management, but whether it influences outcomes is unclear.

Vaginal Laser Therapy for Female Stress Urinary Incontinence: New Solutions for a Well-Known Issue. A Concise Review

Background and Objectives: Insufficient connective urethra and bladder support related to childbirth and menopausal estrogen decrease leads to stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The aim of this review is to narratively report the efficacy and safety of new mini-invasive solutions for SUI treatment as laser energy devices, in particular, the microablative fractional carbon dioxide laser and the non-ablative Erbium-YAG laser. Materials and Methods: For this narrative review, a search of literature from PubMed and EMBASE was performed to evaluate the relevant studies and was limited to English language articles, published from January 2015 to February 2022. Results: A significant subjective improvement, assessed by the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-UI-SF) was reported at the 6-month follow up, with a cure rate ranged from 21% to 38%. A reduction of effect was evidenced between 6 and 24–36 months. Additionally, the 1-h pad weight test evidence a significant objective improvement at the 2–6-month follow up. Conclusions: SUI after vaginal laser therapy resulted statistically improved in almost all studies at short-term follow up, resulting a safe and feasible option in mild SUI. However, cure rates were low, longer-term data actually lacks and the high heterogeneity of methods limits the general recommendations. Larger RCTs evaluating long-term effects are required.

In women with incontinence, the need for pressure-flow study before surgery and abnormalities in the voiding phase. An up-to-date comment on the available problem accompanied by literature

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the differences between urodynamic findings and history in women with urinary incontinence before surgery and clarify the need for preoperative pressure-flow studies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records of 1018 women who underwent urodynamic examination for urinary incontinence between 2010 and 2015 were evaluated retrospectively. Stress (n = 442), urge (n = 334) and mixed (n = 242) were classified as type urinary incontinence according to urodynamics. The voiding phase findings of the patients were examined.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 47.85 ± 0.27 years. 18.4% of patients (n = 187) had voiding phase problems. Furthermore, this condition was seen in the most urge incontinence type urinary incontinence (35%). There was a statistically significant difference between the groups' voiding phase findings (p < 0.0001). The relationship between the patient's history and international consultation on incontinence questionnaire form scoring (ICIQ) and the urodynamics results showed no excellent correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

Voiding phase abnormalities are not uncommon in patients with urinary incontinence. They should be considered in the evaluation of patients. Voiding phase findings may show significant differences between urodynamic data and history. Besides, the data obtained with the questionnaire forms were significantly different from the findings obtained by urodynamics. Consequently, urodynamics may change pre-operative clinical decision.

Prevalence of "uncomplicated" and "complicated" stress urinary incontinence in Argentinian women: Assessing the role of the urodynamic study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the percentage of Argentinian patients with "uncomplicated" and "complicated" stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in whom preoperative urodynamics study (UDS) was performed. The secondary objective of the study was to evaluate differences between clinical observation and urodynamics in both groups of women.

METHODS

A retrospective study of women with IOE derivatives for UDS prior to surgical treatment is performed. The analyzed patients were classified in complicated and not complicated according to the criteria of the study VALUE. The prevalence of different urodynamics observations was assessed in patients with complicated and uncomplicated SUI.

RESULTS

We studied 792 patients with SUI derivatives for UDS. Of the patients studied, 313 (39.5%) were considered as uncomplicated SUI and 479 (60.5%) as complicated SUI. The Urodynamics observation was considered different from the clinical data in 415/792 (52.4%), although in greater proportion in SUI complicated (59.9% vs. 40.9%, p < 0.001). There was a higher incidence of voiding dysfunction in patients with complicated SUI (32.4% vs. 14.7%, p < 0,001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with uncomplicated SUI represent 39% of patients studied with SUI. The differences between clinical evaluation and urodynamics are higher in patients with complicated SUI contributing new information in 60% of the cases.

Recent advances in urodynamics in women

Urodynamics is the study of the storage and evacuation of urine from the urinary tract. The aim is to reproduce the patient’s symptoms and provide a pathophysiological explanation for them by identifying all factors that contribute to the lower urinary tract dysfunction, including those that are asymptomatic. Urodynamics consists of various tests, each of which is designed to assess a different aspect of lower urinary tract function. There is a lack of evidence regarding when urodynamics should be used in the non-neurogenic bladder. Some small randomised controlled trials suggest that urodynamics does not alter the outcome of surgery for stress urinary incontinence when compared with office evaluation alone. However, this is widely felt to be inaccurate and many health-care professionals still advocate the use of urodynamics prior to any invasive treatment, especially surgery on the lower urinary tract. There have been few technological advances in urodynamics in recent years. Air-charged rather than fluid-filled catheters were thought to help reduce artefact, but the evidence is unclear, and there is doubt over their accuracy. Ambulatory urodynamics is carried out over a longer period of time, enabling physiological bladder filling, but it remains invasive and artificial. To attempt to replicate symptoms more accurately, there have been efforts to develop wireless devices to measure detrusor pressure directly. These may be promising but are far from suitable in humans at present. Urodynamics continues to provide useful information for assessing lower urinary tract function, but further large studies are required to assess its value and develop innovations to improve the accuracy of the tests and acceptability to patients.

When should we use urodynamic testing? Recommendations of the Italian Society of Urodynamics (SIUD). Part 1 - Female population

Although, until a few years ago, the diagnostic power of urodynamic testing had never been questioned, recent studies in the literature have raised some doubts on the routine use of this tool. The benefits of the urodynamic studies (UDS) should be weighted against costs, time-consumption and patient discomfort. These recommendations are intended to guide clinicians in the right selection of the female patients to submit to a urodynamic evaluation. We reviewed the literature, regarding the use of UDS in female adults with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and pelvic floor dysfunction. Specifically, we analyzed and compared the guidelines and recommendations of the most important urology and uro-gynecology international scientific societies. These publications were used to create the evidence basis for characterizing the recommendations to perform urodynamic testing. A panel of 10 experts was composed and Delphi process was followed to obtain the panelist consensus. The final recommendations were approved by the unanimous consensus of the panel and compared with the best practice recommendations available in the literature. The recommendations are provided for diagnosis and management of common LUTS in female population. This review provides a summary of the most effective utilization of urodynamic studies for the global evaluation of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms and how to use them when really needed, avoiding unnecessary costs and patient inconveniences.

When should we use urodynamic testing? Recommendations of the Italian Society of Urodynamics (SIUD). Part 2 - Male and neurogical population

Recent studies in literature, have raised some doubts on the routine use of urodynamic testing. Many physicians and articles recommend a selective use of this tool, considering carefully risks and benefits. These recommendations are intended to guide clinicians in the right selection of the male and neurological patients to submit to a urodynamic evaluation. This is the second part of a previous article regarding the urodynamic recommendations in the female population. We reviewed the literature, regarding the use of UDS in male and neurological population with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Specifically, we analyzed and compared the guidelines and recommendations of the most important urology and urogynecology international scientific societies. These publications were used to create the evidence basis for characterizing the recommendations to perform urodynamic testing. A panel of 10 experts was composed and Delphi process was followed to obtain the panelist consensus. The final recommendations were approved by the unanimous consensus of the panel and compared with the best practice recommendations available in the literature. The recommendations are provided for diagnosis and management of common LUTS in male and neurological population. This review provides a summary of the most effective utilization of urodynamic studies for the global evaluation of patients with LUTS, and how to use them when really needed, avoiding unnecessary costs and patient inconveniences.

The role of urodynamics in the management of female stress urinary incontinence

AIM

The role of urodynamic study (UDS) in the management of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is one of the most controversial and debated topic in urogynecology. Here, we aimed to systematically assess the most relevant available evidence on urodynamics' value in the management of women with stress urinary incontinence.

METHODS

A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement was performed in May 2018. Only randomized clinical trials, prospective studies, or retrospective studies articles evaluating the use of urodynamic studies in women with stress urinary incontinence were included.

RESULTS

After screening a total of 3055 records, 39 studies published from 1996 to 2018 were included.

CONCLUSIONS

In an uncomplicated population of women with SUI, it is not demonstrated that preoperative urodynamic evaluation can improve the outcome of continence surgery; however, UDS provides additional information regarding lower urinary tract function that could guide the physician to make the right therapeutic choice. UDS should be considered mandatory before surgery in complicated patients, but its use should also be evaluated in index patients when the results may help counseling and management of these women.

International Consultation on Incontinence 2016; Executive summary: Urodynamic testing

AIMS

The International Consultation on Incontinence has published an update of the recommendations for the diagnosis and management of urine incontinence (ICI2016). This manuscript summarizes the consultations committee-recommendations with regard to urodynamic assessment.

METHODS

Expert consensus on the basis of structured evidence assessment has been the basis of the consultations publication and has been summarized by the committee for this manuscript.

RESULTS

Patients that are not satisfied with their initial management on the basis of their reported signs and symptoms of urinary incontinence, as well as all patients with neurological abnormalities that are potentially relevant for the function of the lower urinary tract, may very likely profit from objective diagnosis and staging and grading of their dysfunction, with urodynamic testing, regardless their age, vulnerability and/or comorbidities. The principles and technical innovations as well as the principal recommendations for the utilization of (invasive) urodynamic assessment for women, men, children, and vulnerable elderly, with or without neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction with urinary incontinence are provided in this abbreviated ICI recommendations-document.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICI2016 committee on urodynamics presents an executive summary of the most important reasons and recommendations for the use of urodynamic investigations for patients with urinary incontinence.

Urodynamics Useless in Female Stress Urinary Incontinence? Time for Some Sense-A European Expert Consensus

BACKGROUND

Routine use of urodynamics (UDS) for the assessment of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) appears to be in decline across Europe. The reasons for this trend appear multifactorial, but the implications are of significant concern.

OBJECTIVES

To achieve an expert consensus viewpoint on the value of UDS in female SUI and current barriers to its use.

METHODOLOGY

A multidisciplinary group of UDS experts from six European countries was convened, and a modified version of the Delphi method was utilised to reach a consensus viewpoint structured around five key questions.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved on all five questions. The group was unanimous that the decline in routine use of UDS is unjustified and misguided, driven by restrictions in funding and accelerated by the publication-and subsequent influence-of two trials that had major limitations.

LIMITATIONS

The authors comprised a selected group of UDS experts and the analysis is not a formal systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive experience and observational studies have demonstrated the value of UDS for the assessment of female SUI and the dangers of empiric management. This evidence base should not be eclipsed by the findings of two randomised controlled trials that had numerous shortcomings.

PATIENT SUMMARY

A group of experts were worried that, even though the cause of incontinence varies, doctors seem to be skipping a diagnostic test called urodynamics (UDS) in some patients and just providing treatment-even surgery-without knowing exactly what is wrong. These experts analysed the situation in detail and reached agreement that UDS testing should not be skipped.

Trends in urodynamic testing prior to midurethral sling placement-What was the value of the VALUE trial?

BACKGROUND

Many urologists use urodynamic testing (UDS) to assist clinical decision-making. The VALUE study, a multi-institutional, randomized controlled trial published in 2012, demonstrated that UDS prior to midurethral sling placement for uncomplicated stress urinary incontinence (SUI) did not change management. We sought to determine whether use of UDS for evaluation of SUI diminished thereafter.

METHODS

Records of patients who underwent isolated mid-urethral sling surgery at our tertiary-care referral center from 2008 to 2009 (pre-VALUE) and 2014 to 2016 (post-VALUE) were reviewed. Comorbidities, presenting symptoms, surgeon specialty, use of UDS, UDS results and sling type were recorded. Patients with neurologic comorbidities or prior anti-incontinence procedures were excluded. Descriptive statistics were calculated and multivariable logistic regression analyses performed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and eighty-seven patients met inclusion criteria. Median age was 54 years. Patients most frequently presented with stress urinary incontinence (56% pre, 50% post), followed by stress predominant mixed urinary incontinence (40% pre, 48% post, P = 0.09). Before VALUE, UDS was performed in 70% of patients prior to primary sling; in the later cohort, this decreased to 41% (P < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, provider specialty (P < 0.0001) and belonging to the pre-VALUE cohort (P = < 0.0001) predicted use of UDS prior to sling.

CONCLUSION

It is paramount that new data be incorporated into diagnostic and treatment algorithms. We found that the rate of preoperative urodynamic testing decreased after publication of a randomized-controlled trial demonstrating that these studies did not change procedural decision-making. Future studies that identify instances of over-testing may have the ability to positively impact patient care and contain costs.

Urodynamic test and female urinary stress incontinence: An open debate

In this editorial we discussed the pros and cons of urodynamics in the assessment of female stress urinary incontinence.

Urodynamics useless before surgery for female stress urinary incontinence: Are you sure? Results from a multicenter single nation database

AIMS

The role of urodynamics (UDS) before surgery for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) remains a debated issue in female urology as well as in urogynaecology and it has been recently questioned on the basis of data coming from selected population of patients defined as "uncomplicated." The aim of this study was to investigate the percentage of "uncomplicated" patients undergoing urodynamic evaluations in six referral Italian centers. The secondary aim was to assess the prevalence of women, for whom the urodynamic evaluation could add new information to the pre-urodynamic picture and in how many cases these findings had a significant impact on patient management.

METHODS

The data of women who underwent urodynamic evaluation prior to surgery for stress urinary incontinence between 2008 and 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the definition of the Value of Urodynamic Evaluation (ValUE) trial criteria, patients presenting with SUI were classified as "uncomplicated" or "complicated." Urodynamic observations were then compared with pre-urodynamic data.

RESULTS

Overall, 2,053 female patients were considered. Only 740/2,053 (36.0%) patients were defined "uncomplicated" according to the definition used in the ValUE trial. The urodynamic observations were not consistent with the pre-urodynamic diagnosis in 1,276 out of 2,053 patients (62.2%). Voiding dysfunctions were urodynamically diagnosed in 394 patients (19.2%). Planned surgery was cancelled or modified in 304 patients (19.2%), due to urodynamic findings.

CONCLUSIONS

"Uncomplicated" patients represent a minority among female SUI patients evaluated before surgery. In "complicated" patients, the role of urodynamic has not been challenged yet and UDS seems still mandatory. Neurourol. Urodynam. 35:809-812, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Urodynamic study in women with pure stress urinary incontinence

OBJECTIVE

To describe the results of urodynamic study in women with pure stress urinary incontinence symptoms, including the characteristics of the overactive detrusor. No other clinical assessments were taken into account.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study in women with urinary incontinence consecutively evaluated by urodynamic study. From a total of 710 women, only 108 (15%) with pure stress urinary incontinence symptoms were selected. Women with prior urinary incontinence surgery, pelvic organ prolapse (stage ≥iii), pelvic radiotherapy, using medication active on the lower urinary tract and neurological diseases were excluded. Infusion rate was 70 ml/min. Detrusor overactivity was induced only by cough. A standardized cough stress test with progressive cough intensity was carried out.

RESULTS

Reference urodynamic values for stress incontinent women are described. Urodynamic stress incontinence was observed in 79 women (73.1%), detrusor overactivity in 4 (3.7%) and mixed urodynamic diagnosis in 15 (13.8%). Test was inconclusive in 10 patients (9.2%). Two women had detrusor overactivity incontinence (1.9%). One patient had detrusor overactivity induced by cough without urodynamic stress incontinence (0.9%). There was an association between detrusor overactivity and nocturia ≥2 (P=.002; odds ratio: 3.74; 95% confidence interval: 1.22-11.39). One woman had a bladder outlet obstruction (0.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

In women with pure stress urinary incontinence, without knowing the outcome of other clinical assessments, urodynamic study can provide useful information to define the proper therapy.

Valsalva leak point pressure-associated Q-tip angle and simple female stress urinary incontinence symptoms

PURPOSE

To clarify the association between clinically defined simple stress urinary incontinence (SUI) symptoms and urodynamic SUI, we examined the relationship between Valsalva leak point pressure (VLPP) as measured by the Q-tip test and Stamey grade in simple female SUI.

METHODS

Two hundred grade I or II female SUI patients with SUI symptom were examined by reviewing medical history; physical examination; urethral mobility as assessed by Q-tip test; stress test; and cystometry, including VLPP measurement. On the basis of the VLPP, patients were classified into urethral hypermobility [UH, subdivided into anatomical incontinence (AI) and equivocal incontinence (EI)] or intrinsic sphincter deficiency groups for analysis of the relationship between VLPP and Stamey grade and Q-tip angle.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were included, and the mean patient age was 54 ± 7.5 years, mean SUI symptom duration 2.8 years (range 0.5-6 years), mean VLPP 103.6 ± 18.4 cm H2O, and mean Q-tip angle 28.6° ± 7.2°. Fifty-three patients were categorized as Stamey grade I, 25 as Stamey grade II, 51 as AI, and 27 as EI. VLPP was found to be negatively correlated with Q-tip angle (Rs = -0.798, Y = -0.313X + 60.95, P < 0.001), and classifications of VLPP and Stamey grade have positive correlation (χ (2) = 4.9130, P = 0.0267).

CONCLUSIONS

In simple female SUI, VLPP is associated with the Q-tip angle and Stamey grade, which may help to reduce some of urodynamic items.

Does preoperative urodynamics improve outcomes for women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Urodynamics is widely used in the investigation of urinary incontinence. The existing evidence questions its add-on value in improving the outcome of surgical treatment for stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the surgical outcomes in women with SUI or stress-predominant mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) based on urodynamic diagnoses compared with diagnoses based on office evaluation without urodynamics.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Cochrane, MedLine, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) and Google Scholar databases from inception until March 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical outcomes in women investigated by urodynamics and women who had office evaluation only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers (S.R. and P.L.) extracted the data and analysed it using review manager (revman) 5.2 software.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 388 articles identified, only four RCTs met our criteria. The data from one study are as yet unpublished. In the other three RCTs, the women with SUI or stress-predominant MUI were randomised either to office evaluation and urodynamics (n = 388) or to office evaluation only (n = 387). There was no statistical difference in the risk ratio (RR) of subjective cure in the two groups (RR 1.02, 95%CI 0.90-1.15, P = 0.79, I(2) = 45%), objective cure (RR 1.01, 95%CI 0.93-1.11, P = 0.28, I(2) = 20%) or complications such as voiding dysfunction (RR 1.54, 95%CI 0.61-3.89, P = 0.27, I(2) = 18%) or urinary urgency (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.28-2.3, P = 0.19, I(2) = 40%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In women undergoing primary surgery for SUI or stress-predominant MUI without voiding difficulties, urodynamics does not improve outcomes - as long as the women undergo careful office evaluation.