Yasmine Khayyami1,2, Niels Klarskov3, Gunnar Lose3. 1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Copenhagen, Herlev hospital, Herlev, Denmark. yasmine.khayyami@gmail.com. 2. , Pileskellet 12, 2000, Frederiksberg, Denmark. yasmine.khayyami@gmail.com. 3. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Copenhagen, Herlev hospital, Herlev, Denmark.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: It has been claimed that post-void residual urine (PVR) below 150 ml rules out voiding dysfunction in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and provides license to perform sling surgery. The cut-off of 150 ml seems arbitrary, not evidence-based, and so we sought to investigate the ability of PVR < 150 ml to exclude voiding dysfunction. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of all patients who underwent invasive urodynamics from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2013. Voiding dysfunction was diagnosed if both the invasive urodynamic and the free flow showed abnormal results. We registered the PVR in patients with voiding dysfunction and divided them into groups with PVR < 150 ml and PVR ≥ 150 ml. Patients were then analyzed for bladder outlet obstruction and detrusor underactivity. RESULTS: Of the 205 patients undergoing invasive urodynamics in 2013, a total of 20 had voiding dysfunction, 2 with PVR ≥ 150 ml. Eighteen patients had PVR < 150 ml (range 0-50 ml); 9 had bladder outlet obstruction while 7 had detrusor underactivity. Two patients were uncategorized. Out of the 20 patients, 7 had no symptoms or complaints indicating voiding dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with voiding dysfunction often have normal PVR and so PVR < 150 ml cannot exclude voiding dysfunction. All patients should be evaluated using free flow measurements along with PVR to obtain a reliable, objective measurement of their voiding pattern, before anti-incontinence surgery.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: It has been claimed that post-void residual urine (PVR) below 150 ml rules out voiding dysfunction in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and provides license to perform sling surgery. The cut-off of 150 ml seems arbitrary, not evidence-based, and so we sought to investigate the ability of PVR < 150 ml to exclude voiding dysfunction. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of all patients who underwent invasive urodynamics from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2013. Voiding dysfunction was diagnosed if both the invasive urodynamic and the free flow showed abnormal results. We registered the PVR in patients with voiding dysfunction and divided them into groups with PVR < 150 ml and PVR ≥ 150 ml. Patients were then analyzed for bladder outlet obstruction and detrusor underactivity. RESULTS: Of the 205 patients undergoing invasive urodynamics in 2013, a total of 20 had voiding dysfunction, 2 with PVR ≥ 150 ml. Eighteen patients had PVR < 150 ml (range 0-50 ml); 9 had bladder outlet obstruction while 7 had detrusor underactivity. Two patients were uncategorized. Out of the 20 patients, 7 had no symptoms or complaints indicating voiding dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with voiding dysfunction often have normal PVR and so PVR < 150 ml cannot exclude voiding dysfunction. All patients should be evaluated using free flow measurements along with PVR to obtain a reliable, objective measurement of their voiding pattern, before anti-incontinence surgery.
Authors: Werner Schäfer; Paul Abrams; Limin Liao; Anders Mattiasson; Francesco Pesce; Anders Spangberg; Arthur M Sterling; Norman R Zinner; Philip van Kerrebroeck Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Paul Abrams; Linda Cardozo; Magnus Fall; Derek Griffiths; Peter Rosier; Ulf Ulmsten; Philip Van Kerrebroeck; Arne Victor; Alan Wein Journal: Urology Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 2.649
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
Authors: Larry T Sirls; Holly E Richter; Heather J Litman; Kimberly Kenton; Gary E Lemack; Emily S Lukacz; Stephen R Kraus; Howard B Goldman; Alison Weidner; Leslie Rickey; Peggy Norton; Halina M Zyczynski; John W Kusek Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-10-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Nadir I Osman; Christopher R Chapple; Paul Abrams; Roger Dmochowski; François Haab; Victor Nitti; Heinz Koelbl; Philip van Kerrebroeck; Alan J Wein Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-10-26 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Hannah T Ryles; Stephanie A Sansone; Pamela J Levin; Uduak U Andy; Heidi S Harvie; Lily A Arya Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 1.913
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: Juan Pablo Valdevenito; José Flores; Rodrigo Guzman Rojas; Valentin Manriquez; Leandro Arribillaga; Juan de Benito Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2019 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.541