Penile Compression Release Index Revisited: Evaluation and Comparison with Other Noninvasive Tools in the Prediction of Bladder Outlet Obstruction in Men with Benign Prostatic Enlargement

The diagnostic value of non-invasive methods for diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms: A meta-analysis

Purpose

We conducted the first meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic value of non-invasive methods for diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).

Methods

We searched a range of databases for relevant publications up to June 2022, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Retrieved studies were then reviewed for eligibility and data were extracted. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. We then performed a formal meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of various non-invasive methods for diagnosing BOO in men.

Results

We identified 51 eligible studies including 7,897 patients for meta-analysis. The majority of the studies had a low overall RoB. Detrusor wall thickness (DWT) (pooled sensitivity (SSY): 71%; specificity (SPY): 88%; diagnostic odds ratio (DOR): 17.15; area under curve (AUC) 0.87) and the penile cuff test (PCT) (pooled SSY: 87%; SPY: 78%; DOR: 23.54; AUC: 0.88) showed high accuracy for diagnosing BOO. Furthermore, data suggested that DWT had the highest pooled SPY (0.89), DOR (32.58), and AUC (0.90), when using 2 mm as the cut-off.

Conclusion

Of the non-invasive tests tested, DWT and PCT had the highest levels of diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing BOO in men with LUTS. DWT, with a 2 mm cut-off, had the highest level of accuracy. These two methods represent good options as non-invasive tools for evaluating BOO in males.

Use of the penile cuff test to diagnose bladder outlet obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Among noninvasive modalities for assessing bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), the penile cuff test (PCT) is the most used in clinical practice. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the performance of PCT in diagnosing and managing BOO.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for studies investigating use of PCT for BOO. Studies evaluating diagnostic parameters, inter-observer agreements, or treatment outcomes using PCT were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol was followed (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022300047). A proportional meta-analysis was done for diagnostic accuracy proportions. The Egger's and the Begg-Mazumdar rank-correlation tests were used to assess publication bias. Risk of bias was assessed using the Gradings of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 272 articles retrieved, 17 were included in qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis was performed on five studies (comprising 448 patients). Two studies evaluating inter-observer agreement demonstrated 95% agreement and five studies evaluating procedures reported a 66%-80% surgical success rate on obstructed patients using PCT. From the proportional meta-analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were 0.85 (95% CI 0.71-0.95) 0.78 (95% CI 0.67-0.87), 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-0.91), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-0.96), respectively. Publication bias was noted for PPV but not for sensitivity, specificity, or NPV. Based on the GRADE criteria, there were two low, six moderate, and nine high-quality studies.

CONCLUSIONS

PCT performs sufficiently in diagnosing and managing BOO. However, due to variability in obstruction criteria assessment, more studies comparing diagnostic criteria are warranted.

Reliability and validity of assessment methods available in primary care for bladder outlet obstruction and benign prostatic obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the literature regarding the reliability and validity of assessment methods available in primary care for bladder outlet obstruction or benign prostatic obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).

DESIGN

Systematic review with best evidence synthesis.

SETTING

Primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Men with LUTS due to bladder outlet obstruction or benign prostatic obstruction.

REVIEW METHODS

PubMed, Ebsco/CINAHL and Embase databases were searched for studies on the validity and reliability of assessment methods for bladder outlet obstruction and benign prostatic obstruction in primary care. Methodological quality was assessed with the COSMIN checklist. Studies with poor methodology were excluded from the best evidence synthesis.

RESULTS

Of the 5644 studies identified, 61 were scored with the COSMIN checklist, 37 studies were included in the best evidence synthesis, 18 evaluated bladder outlet obstruction and 17 benign prostatic obstruction, 2 evaluated both. Overall, reliability was poorly evaluated. Transrectal and transabdominal ultrasound showed moderate to good validity to evaluate bladder outlet obstruction. Measured prostate volume with these ultrasound methods, to identify benign prostatic obstruction, showed moderate to good accuracy, supported by a moderate to high level of evidence. Uroflowmetry for bladder outlet obstruction showed poor to moderate diagnostic accuracy, depending on used cut-off values. Questionnaires were supported by high-quality evidence, although correlations and diagnostic accuracy were poor to moderate compared with criterion tests. Other methods were supported by low level evidence.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians in primary care can incorporate transabdominal and transrectal ultrasound or uroflowmetry in the evaluation of men with LUTS but should not solely rely on these methods as the diagnostic accuracy is insufficient and reliability remains insufficiently researched. Low-to-moderate levels of evidence for most assessment methods were due to methodological shortcomings and inconsistency in the studies. This highlights the need for better study designs in this domain.