M Masarani1, R G Willis. 1. Department of Urology, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, Cornwall, UK. mmasaarane@yahoo.co.uk
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Review of the literature reveals little evidence to prove the efficacy of urethral dilatation for adult women with various lower urinary tract complaints. We conducted a postal survey to ascertain the actual practice of urethral dilatation among urologists in the UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to 428 consultant urologists listed as full members of the British Association of Urological Surgeons. The questionnaire consisted of 8 items about urologists' perception of indications, efficacy, and the need for repeated dilatation and anaesthesia. RESULTS: The questionnaire response rate was 42%. Although urethral stenosis was the most common indication (97%), the majority of urologists (69%) indicated that fewer than 25% of patients had evidence of stenosis. Overall, 61% of urologists performed dilatation 7 times or more during the last year and 55% believed that less than half of the patients experienced long-term improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of strong evidence to support the use of urethral dilatation in women, many urologists continue to find it a useful tool in approaching women with lower urinary tract complaints.
INTRODUCTION: Review of the literature reveals little evidence to prove the efficacy of urethral dilatation for adult women with various lower urinary tract complaints. We conducted a postal survey to ascertain the actual practice of urethral dilatation among urologists in the UK. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed to 428 consultant urologists listed as full members of the British Association of Urological Surgeons. The questionnaire consisted of 8 items about urologists' perception of indications, efficacy, and the need for repeated dilatation and anaesthesia. RESULTS: The questionnaire response rate was 42%. Although urethral stenosis was the most common indication (97%), the majority of urologists (69%) indicated that fewer than 25% of patients had evidence of stenosis. Overall, 61% of urologists performed dilatation 7 times or more during the last year and 55% believed that less than half of the patients experienced long-term improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lack of strong evidence to support the use of urethral dilatation in women, many urologists continue to find it a useful tool in approaching women with lower urinary tract complaints.