Literature DB >> 18295276

Urodynamic measures do not predict stress continence outcomes after surgery for stress urinary incontinence in selected women.

Charles W Nager1, MaryPat FitzGerald, Stephen R Kraus, Toby C Chai, Halina Zyczynski, Larry Sirls, Gary E Lemack, L Keith Lloyd, Heather J Litman, Anne M Stoddard, Jan Baker, William Steers.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We determined the prognostic value of preoperative urodynamic results in patients with stress urinary incontinence.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a 9-center surgical trial, women with stress urinary incontinence were randomized to a Burch or pubovaginal sling procedure. Women were eligible for the study if they had predominant stress urinary incontinence symptoms, a positive cough stress test, a bladder capacity more than 200 ml and urethral hypermobility. Preoperative free uroflowmetry, filling cystometry and pressure flow studies were performed in all. Overall treatment success required a negative pad test, no urinary incontinence on a 3-day diary, a negative stress test, no self-reported stress urinary incontinence symptoms and no re-treatment for stress urinary incontinence. Stress specific success required all of the last 3 criteria. We examined urodynamic measures, and whether the presence of urodynamic stress incontinence, the presence of detrusor overactivity and Valsalva leak point pressure would predict surgical success.
RESULTS: Subjects with urodynamic stress incontinence had a 2-fold greater odds of overall success when compared with the No urodynamic stress incontinence group, but this trend did not quite reach statistical significance (OR 2.26; 95% C.I. 0.99, 5.17). Odds of stress specific success did not differ by urodynamic stress incontinence status. Subjects with detrusor overactivity did not have significantly worse success rates. Stratifying by treatment group, there was no difference in mean Valsalva leak point pressure values between surgical successes and failures.
CONCLUSIONS: We found a nearly statistically significant trend that women with urodynamic stress incontinence are twice as likely to have a successful overall outcome from surgical management of stress urinary incontinence as women without urodynamic stress incontinence. The level of Valsalva leak point pressure and the presence of detrusor overactivity do not predict the success outcomes after the Burch or autologous fascia sling procedures in women with pure or predominant stress urinary incontinence. The impact of urodynamic studies on surgical outcomes needs further investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18295276     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  33 in total

1.  Preoperative clinical, demographic, and urodynamic measures associated with failure to demonstrate urodynamic stress incontinence in women enrolled in two randomized clinical trials of surgery for stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Gary E Lemack; Heather J Litman; Charles Nager; Linda Brubaker; Jerry Lowder; Peggy Norton; Larry Sirls; Keith Lloyd; John W Kusek
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 2.  Do urodynamic parameters predict persistent postoperative stress incontinence after midurethral sling? A systematic review.

Authors:  Amie Kawasaki; Jennifer M Wu; Cindy L Amundsen; Alison C Weidner; John P Judd; Ethan M Balk; Nazema Y Siddiqui
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2012-03-09       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Patient satisfaction with stress incontinence surgery.

Authors:  Kathryn L Burgio; Linda Brubaker; Holly E Richter; Clifford Y Wai; Heather J Litman; Diane Borello France; Shawn A Menefee; Larry T Sirls; Stephen R Kraus; Harry W Johnson; Sharon L Tennstedt
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.696

Review 4.  The role of preoperative urodynamics in stress urinary incontinence surgery.

Authors:  Duane R Hickling; Stephen S Steele
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 5.  The role of fascial slings in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence in women: a 2013 update.

Authors:  Jack C Hou; Gary E Lemack
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.092

6.  Preoperative hesitating urinary stream is associated with postoperative voiding dysfunction and surgical failure following Burch colposuspension or pubovaginal rectus fascial sling surgery.

Authors:  Tatiana V Sanses; Linda Brubaker; Yan Xu; Stephen R Kraus; Jerry L Lowder; Gary E Lemack; Peggy Norton; Heather J Litman; Sharon L Tennstedt; Toby C Chai
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-12-03       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  A comprehensive look at risk factors for mid-urethral sling revision surgery.

Authors:  Melissa Keslar; Haroutyoun Margossian; Justin E Katz; Nisha Lakhi
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Pain and embarrassment associated with urodynamic testing in women.

Authors:  Jennifer Y Yeung; Michaela A Eschenbacher; Rachel N Pauls
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  Patterns and predictors of urodynamics use in the United States.

Authors:  W Stuart Reynolds; Roger R Dmochowski; Julie Lai; Chris Saigal; David F Penson
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  Protocol for the value of urodynamics prior to stress incontinence surgery (VUSIS) study: a multicenter randomized controlled trial to assess the cost effectiveness of urodynamics in women with symptoms of stress urinary incontinence in whom surgical treatment is considered.

Authors:  Sanne A L van Leijsen; Kirsten B Kluivers; Ben Willem J Mol; Suzan R Broekhuis; Fred L Milani; C Huub van der Vaart; Jan-Paul W R Roovers; Marlies Y Bongers; Jan den Boon; Wilbert A Spaans; Jan Willem de Leeuw; Viviane Dietz; Jan H Kleinjan; Hans A M Brölmann; Eveline J Roos; Judith Schaafstra; John P F A Heesakkers; Mark E Vierhout
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 2.809

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.