Anastasios D Asimakopoulos1, Cosimo De Nunzio2, Ervin Kocjancic3, Andrea Tubaro2, Peter F Rosier4, Enrico Finazzi-Agrò5. 1. UOC of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Tor Vergata, Policlinico Casilino, Rome, Italy. 2. Department of Urology, Sant'Andrea Hospital, Faculty of Health Sciences "La Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 3. Director division of Pelvic Health and Reconstructive Urology, Department of Urology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. 4. University Medical Centre Utrecht, Department of Urology, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 5. Unit for Functional Urology, Policlinico Tor Vergata, Department of Experimental Medicine and Surgery, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Abstract
AIMS: To present the teaching module "Measurement of Post-void residual urine." METHODS: This module has been prepared by a Working Group of the ICS Urodynamics Committee. The methodology used included comprehensive literature review, consensus formation by the members of the Working Group, and review by members of the ICS Urodynamics Committee core panel. RESULTS: In this ICS teaching module the evidence for and relevance of PVR measurement in patients with lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD) is summarized; in short: The interval between voiding and post-void residual (PVR) measurement should be of short duration and ultrasound bladder volume measurement is preferred to urethral catheterization. There is no universally accepted definition of a significant residual urine volume. Large PVR (>200-300 ml) may indicate marked bladder dysfunction and may predispose to unsatisfactory treatment results if for example, invasive treatment for bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) is undertaken. PVR does not seem to be a strong predictor of acute urinary retention and does not indicate presence of BOO specifically. Although the evidence base is limited, guidelines on assessment of LUTS generally include PVR measurement. CONCLUSION: Measurement of PVR is recommended in guidelines and recommendations on the management of LUTS and urinary incontinence, but the level of evidence for this measurement is not high. This manuscript summarizes the evidence and provides practice recommendations for teaching purposes in the framework of an ICS teaching module.
AIMS: To present the teaching module "Measurement of Post-void residual urine." METHODS: This module has been prepared by a Working Group of the ICS Urodynamics Committee. The methodology used included comprehensive literature review, consensus formation by the members of the Working Group, and review by members of the ICS Urodynamics Committee core panel. RESULTS: In this ICS teaching module the evidence for and relevance of PVR measurement in patients with lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD) is summarized; in short: The interval between voiding and post-void residual (PVR) measurement should be of short duration and ultrasound bladder volume measurement is preferred to urethral catheterization. There is no universally accepted definition of a significant residual urine volume. Large PVR (>200-300 ml) may indicate marked bladder dysfunction and may predispose to unsatisfactory treatment results if for example, invasive treatment for bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) is undertaken. PVR does not seem to be a strong predictor of acute urinary retention and does not indicate presence of BOO specifically. Although the evidence base is limited, guidelines on assessment of LUTS generally include PVR measurement. CONCLUSION: Measurement of PVR is recommended in guidelines and recommendations on the management of LUTS and urinary incontinence, but the level of evidence for this measurement is not high. This manuscript summarizes the evidence and provides practice recommendations for teaching purposes in the framework of an ICS teaching module.
Authors: Andrew C Peterson; Abigail R Smith; Matthew O Fraser; Claire C Yang; John O L DeLancey; Brenda W Gillespie; John L Gore; Pooja Talaty; Victor P Andreev; Karl J Kreder; Margaret G Mueller; H Henry Lai; Bradley A Erickson; Ziya Kirkali Journal: Urology Date: 2019-04-21 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Rui Li; Anna S Nagle; Kaitlyn M Maddra; Naomi Vinod; Suzanne A Prince; Sarah I Tensen; Devina Thapa; Blessan Sebastian; Dhruv Sethi; Abraham Alattar; Laura R Carucci; Adam P Klausner; John E Speich Journal: Am J Clin Exp Urol Date: 2021-10-15
Authors: Stefan Mohr; Luigi Raio; Ursula Gobrecht-Keller; Sara Imboden; Michael D Mueller; Annette Kuhn Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2022-02-07 Impact factor: 1.932
Authors: Femke E M Mulder; Robert A Hakvoort; Jan-Peter de Bruin; Erica W Janszen; Joris A M van der Post; Jan-Paul W R Roovers Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 2.894