PURPOSE: We evaluated pediatric patients who were treated with biofeedback for dysfunctional voiding with respect to clinical outcome and objective changes in uroflow parameters and post-void residual. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 81 patients treated for dysfunctional voiding and/or urinary tract infections with biofeedback. Conservative management had previously failed in all patients. Uroflow data and symptoms were reviewed, and clinical outcomes were recorded. For analysis, patients were stratified by symptoms of incontinence or presence of urinary tract infections. RESULTS: Of 73 patients with incontinence 22 (30%) became dry, 36 (49%) had improvement and 15 (21%) reported no change following biofeedback. In 39 (78%) of 50 patients with recurrent urinary tract infections resolved. Overall, there was a significant (p <0.002) increase in peak flow and average flow rate, and a significant decrease in post-void residual and post-void residual as a percent of predicted bladder capacity. There was no significant change in voided volume following biofeedback. Overall, there was no significant difference in uroflow parameters and post-void residual following biofeedback between patients with incontinence or infections, except for a higher maximum flow rate in patients who continued to have infections. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of children with pelvic floor muscle biofeedback is associated with improved urinary continence and decreased urinary tract infections in the majority. It results in improvement in uroflow curves and parameters, and a decreased post-void residual. Posttreatment results of these parameters did not correlate with improvement in continence and urinary tract infections.
PURPOSE: We evaluated pediatric patients who were treated with biofeedback for dysfunctional voiding with respect to clinical outcome and objective changes in uroflow parameters and post-void residual. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 81 patients treated for dysfunctional voiding and/or urinary tract infections with biofeedback. Conservative management had previously failed in all patients. Uroflow data and symptoms were reviewed, and clinical outcomes were recorded. For analysis, patients were stratified by symptoms of incontinence or presence of urinary tract infections. RESULTS: Of 73 patients with incontinence 22 (30%) became dry, 36 (49%) had improvement and 15 (21%) reported no change following biofeedback. In 39 (78%) of 50 patients with recurrent urinary tract infections resolved. Overall, there was a significant (p <0.002) increase in peak flow and average flow rate, and a significant decrease in post-void residual and post-void residual as a percent of predicted bladder capacity. There was no significant change in voided volume following biofeedback. Overall, there was no significant difference in uroflow parameters and post-void residual following biofeedback between patients with incontinence or infections, except for a higher maximum flow rate in patients who continued to have infections. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of children with pelvic floor muscle biofeedback is associated with improved urinary continence and decreased urinary tract infections in the majority. It results in improvement in uroflow curves and parameters, and a decreased post-void residual. Posttreatment results of these parameters did not correlate with improvement in continence and urinary tract infections.