The Value of Urodynamics in an Academic Specialty Referral Practice

How should prospective research be designed to legitimately assess the value of urodynamic studies in female urinary incontinence?

AIMS

Since formal evidence demonstrating the value of urodynamic studies (UDS) in functional urology remains elusive, we aimed to consider how best to design robust research for this purpose in female urinary incontinence.

METHODS

An expert group was convened to debate the following considerations: (a) precedents for formally proving the value of a gold standard diagnostic test, (b) key research principles, (c) defining a study population, (d) selecting endpoints, (e) defining interventional and controls arms, (f) blinding, (g) powering the study, and (h) duration of follow-up. In each case, we considered the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches in terms of scientific validity, ethical acceptability, practicality, and likelihood of bias.

RESULTS

We agreed that unlike evaluating therapies, attempting to judge the value of a diagnostic test based on eventual treatment success is conceptually flawed. Nonetheless, we explored the design of a hypothetical randomized controlled trial for this purpose, agreeing that: (1) the study population must sufficiently reflect its real-world counterpart; (2) clinical endpoints should include not only continence status but also other lower urinary tract symptoms and risks of management; (3) participants in the interventional arm should receive individualized management based on their UDS findings; (4) the most scientifically valid approach to the control arm-empiric treatment-is ethically problematic; (5) sufficient statistical power is imperative; and (6) ≥ 2 years' follow-up is needed to assess the long-term impact of management.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a perfect protocol does not exist, we recommend careful consideration of our observations when reflecting on past studies or planning new prospective research.

What do X-ray images of the bladder during video urodynamics show us in patients with spinal cord injury?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective anonymized cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To study X-ray images of video urodynamics (VUD) in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI).

SETTING

Single-center study.

METHODS

X-ray images during VUD were categorized. Relation with the American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS), time since and level of SCI, cystometric data, method of bladder management, findings of flexible cystoscopy, and renal ultrasound were evaluated. Changes over time were studied.

RESULTS

In 231 consecutive patients, VUD was done at a mean of 8.5 years after SCI. X3-ray bladder appearance was categorized as normal/standard, tonic, or flaccid. In 19 patients, specific findings were seen: diverticula, cystocele, vesicoureteral reflux. X-ray images differed by maximum cystometric capacity, presence of neurogenic detrusor overactivity, and maximum detrusor pressure during detrusor overactivity, but not by bladder compliance. There was no difference in the categories found in different levels and completeness of SCI. In the 23 patients able to void no pathology was seen on urethral images. Renal ultrasound was normal in >99%. In 86 patients, repeated testing after 72 ± 143 weeks showed changed findings in 30%. Cystoscopy showed significantly more local pathologies.

CONCLUSION

Complications in the lower urinary tract were seen on imaging only in a limited number of our cohort. As our findings represent a real-life example of the actual yield of VUD in patients with neurogenic bladder due to SCI treated following the international guidelines, further multicentre evaluation is needed to determine when imaging should be used or not.

Influence of the urethral pressure transducer in measuring Valsalva leak point pressure in women undergoing multichannel urodynamic testing

AIMS

To determine if the air-charged urethral sensor balloon currently used in urodynamic testing (UDS) significantly impacts Valsalva leak point pressure (VLPP) measurements.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of women undergoing UDS at an academic institution. VLPPs were obtained at 150 mL and urodynamic capacity with and without the urethral pressure sensor in the urethra. VLPP measurements were analyzed using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Median and interquartile range are presented.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients were enrolled in the study, 53 were included in the primary analysis. The mean age of the subjects was 56.2 ± 12.1 years. Nine patients (16%) solely leaked when the balloon was not present in the urethra either with cough or during VLPP measurement. At both 150 mL and urodynamic capacity, when VLPP testing was performed, there was a significant difference (cmH₂ O) between the control and intervention values, (76.2 [55.0, 97.0] vs 68.8 [46.3, 93.3], P = .0012; 79.3 [53, 96.5] vs 72.5 [50.8, 92.3], P = .04). There was also a statistically significant difference between the control and intervention values for the lowest leak value at 150 mL and capacity (70.5 [51, 94.5] vs 60.0 [40, 88] P = .002; 73.5 [49.5, 91.5] vs 61 [45, 88], P = .017).

CONCLUSIONS

The higher VLPPs obtained with the urethral balloon in place indicate that the balloon may be the cause of falsely elevated VLPPs during urodynamic testing. Additionally, the balloon may mask a diagnosis of stress urinary incontinence in some patients.

The bladder is an unreliable witness: The case for urodynamic investigations in female stress urinary incontinence

For some years, the role of urodynamics (UDS) in female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) has been a topic of intense debate. The findings of the VaLUE and VUSIS-II randomised clinical trials (RCTs) published in 2012 appeared to suggest that UDS is not useful in women with uncomplicated SUI, with the result that several authoritative guidelines were amended and the routine use of UDS in this setting fell sharply. However, many experts have raised concerns about the design of these two RCTs and their subsequent interpretation - including the inappropriate generalisation of the findings beyond uncomplicated cases, which represent only a small minority of the overall patient population. In this paper, we consider a range of issues and confounding factors which raise doubts about how influential these RCTs should have been and reflect on the potential value of UDS both for objective diagnosis and patient counselling in female SUI.

A narrative review of the epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of latent stress urinary incontinence

AIMS

To review the current literature on the development of latent stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or SUI that occurs following pelvic organ prolapse therapy in patients who were continent prior to therapy. To make recommendations on how to best evaluate and manage patients with pelvic organ prolapse who are continent.

METHODS

This is a narrative review using Google scholar and cross referencing identified manuscripts. We used the British Medical Journals grading of literature to assign letter grades to level of statements and recommendations.

RESULTS

The literature suggest about 40% of women with advanced pelvic organ prolapse who are continent will develop SUI after surgery to correct their pelvic organ prolapse. Reduction cough stress testing can help identify those patients at risk to develop SUI with a PPV of 60%. Reduction cough stress testing is best done using large rectal swabs or scopettes. The literature on how to best manage patients with advanced pelvic organ prolapse and are continent to avoid latent SUI is mixed and the best recommendations are based on sound literature that is incomplete.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding that latent SUI is a potential complication in any subject with advanced pelvic organ prolapse is necessary to pre-operative counseling. Deciding on the best management strategy is not clear cut and therefore should involve patient input in the decision making process.

Prospective Evaluation of Urodynamic Utility in a Subspecialty Tertiary Practice

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively evaluated the utility of urodynamic evaluations (UDS) ordered in a tertiary referral center as part of a quality improvement project.

METHODS

Patients with UDS ordered by 3 subspecialty physicians were included. Physicians were surveyed when ordering UDS and at the post-UDS clinic visit to assess indications for UDS, pre- and post-UDS diagnosis, treatment plan, confidence level, and perceived helpfulness of UDS. UDS trained nurses conducting studies were surveyed on patient reported reproducibility of their symptoms and perceived difficulty of UDS.

RESULTS

From April 2017 to October 2017, 127 UDS were included of which 102 met study criteria. UDS were done for neurogenic (23%) and non-neurogenic lower urinary tract symptoms (76%). The majority were conducted for incontinence evaluation (79%), or after prior lower urinary tract surgery (33%). UDS nurses reported 90% of UDS fully or partially reproduced patient symptoms. Nurses found 18% of UDS difficult due to catheter malfunctions, physical limitations, and communication abilities. Post-UDS, providers found 97% of UDS interpretable. UDS resulted in a change in treatment plan in 78% of patients. On a Likert scale, mean pre-UDS confidence level was 2.9 ± 0.8 (range 0-5). This increased to 4.1 ± 0.6 post-UDS with 76% of evaluations having a change of at least 1 point.

CONCLUSION

UDS in a tertiary referral center result in change in patient treatment plans over three-fourths of the time with high rates of interpretability.

Should We Always Use Antibiotics after Urodynamic Studies in High-Risk Patients?

Aim

The aim of this observational study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a phytotherapic drug (Canephron N) in preventing urinary tract infection (UTI) in high-risk women undergoing urodynamic studies (UDS).

Methods

The study protocol was approved by the local institutional ethical committee. Adult women with at least one risk factor for acquiring UTI (defined as: age over 70, elevated postvoid residual urine>100 ml, recurrent UTI, pelvic organ prolapse (POP) ≥II in POP-Q scale, and neurogenic bladder) had received after UDS either a single oral dose of fosfomycin trometamol (FT) (3 grams) or a phytodrug containing centaury herb, lovage root, and rosemary leaves (5 ml taken orally three times daily for one week). All patients included in the study had no pyuria according to urine dipstick (nitrite and/or blood and/or leukocyte esterase) and negative urine culture (CFU < 10³/ml) before UDS. Urine samples were also tested 7 days after UDS.

Results

Seventy-two high-risk participants completed the study. Seven days after urodynamic studies UTI symptoms, pyuria (nitrite and/or blood and/or leukocyte esterase) and bacteriuria with E. coli occurred in two patients (one (2.8%) in the FT and one (2.7%) in the phytodrug group, respectively). No statistical differences in UTI incidence were found between both treatment groups. We did not observe any additional adverse events in both groups. The major disadvantage of prophylaxis with the phytodrug as compared to FT was the necessity of continuing therapy for 7 days.

Conclusion

Prophylaxis of UTI with a phytodrug (Canephron N) may be considered a good alternative to antibiotic prophylaxis use after UDS in high-risk female patients.

Urodynamics and diagnosis of urinary incontinence

The urinary incontinence diagnostic process should include a medical history focused on ailments related to it and their impact on the quality of patient’s life. The lack of proper control over the function of the lower urinary tract creates a lot of troubles for sufferers and prevents them from living an active professional, social, and family life. The patient with a suspicion of urinary incontinence is recommended to record in a voiding diary the number of mictions per day, the volume of urine, and episodes of incontinence. The invasive test called urodynamics is based on cystometry, profilometry, and uroflowmetry. A urodynamic examination performed in patients with incontinence allows for correct diagnosis and proposal of specific surgical or pharmacological treatment.

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.