PURPOSE: The authors of this guideline reviewed the literature regarding use of urodynamic testing in common lower urinary tract symptoms. The findings are intended to assist clinicians in the appropriate selection of urodynamic tests, following an evaluation and symptom characterization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE® and EMBASE databases (searched from 1/1/90 to 3/10/11) was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to using urodynamic tests for diagnosis, determining prognosis, guiding clinical management decisions and improving patient outcomes in patients with various urologic conditions. The review yielded an evidence base of 393 studies after application of inclusion/exclusion criteria. These publications were used to create the evidence basis for characterizing the statements presented in the guideline as Standards, Recommendations or Options. When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence for a particular treatment was assigned a strength rating of A (high), B (moderate) or C (low). In the absence of sufficient evidence, additional information is provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinion. RESULTS: The evidence-based guideline statements are provided for diagnosis and overall management of common LUTS conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The Panel recognizes that each patient presenting with LUTS is unique. This Guideline is intended to serve as a tool facilitating the most effective utilization of urodynamic testing as part of a comprehensive evaluation of patients presenting with LUTS.
PURPOSE: The authors of this guideline reviewed the literature regarding use of urodynamic testing in common lower urinary tract symptoms. The findings are intended to assist clinicians in the appropriate selection of urodynamic tests, following an evaluation and symptom characterization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the literature using the MEDLINE® and EMBASE databases (searched from 1/1/90 to 3/10/11) was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to using urodynamic tests for diagnosis, determining prognosis, guiding clinical management decisions and improving patient outcomes in patients with various urologic conditions. The review yielded an evidence base of 393 studies after application of inclusion/exclusion criteria. These publications were used to create the evidence basis for characterizing the statements presented in the guideline as Standards, Recommendations or Options. When sufficient evidence existed, the body of evidence for a particular treatment was assigned a strength rating of A (high), B (moderate) or C (low). In the absence of sufficient evidence, additional information is provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinion. RESULTS: The evidence-based guideline statements are provided for diagnosis and overall management of common LUTS conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The Panel recognizes that each patient presenting with LUTS is unique. This Guideline is intended to serve as a tool facilitating the most effective utilization of urodynamic testing as part of a comprehensive evaluation of patients presenting with LUTS.
Authors: Anne M Suskind; Lindsey Cox; J Quentin Clemens; Ann Oldendorf; John T Stoffel; Bahaa Malaeb; Yongmei Qin; Anne P Cameron Journal: Urology Date: 2017-04-10 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Dale E Bjorling; Zunyi Wang; Chad M Vezina; William A Ricke; Kimberly P Keil; Weiqun Yu; Lianyu Guo; Mark L Zeidel; Warren G Hill Journal: Am J Physiol Renal Physiol Date: 2015-04-22