Luis Abranches-Monteiro1, Rizwan Hamid2, Carlos D'Ancona3, Ammar Alhasso4, Roger Dmochowski5, Hazel Ecclestone6, Bernard Haylen7, Riyad Al Mousa8, Rahmi Onur9, Shahzad Shah10, Pawan Vasudeva11, Matthias Oelke12. 1. Department of Urology, Hospital Egas Moniz, Lisbon, Portugal. 2. Department of Urology, University College London Hospitals, London, UK. 3. Department of Urology, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. 4. Department of Urology, Western General University Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland. 5. Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenessee, USA. 6. Northwick Park Hospital, London, UK. 7. Department of Gynaecology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 8. Department of Urology & Neurourology, King Fahd Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia. 9. Department of Urology, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. 10. Department of Urology, Watford General Hospital, London, UK. 11. Department of Urology, VMMC & Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India. 12. Department of Urology, Paediatric Urology and Uro-Oncology, St. Antonius Hospital, Gronau, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In the development of terminology of the lower urinary tract (LUT), due to its increasing complexity, the terminology for male LUT surgery needs to be updated using a male-specific approach and via a clinically-based consensus report. METHODS: This report combines the input of members of the Standardization Committee of the International Continence Society in a Working Group with recognized experts in the field, assisted by many external referees. Appropriate core clinical categories and a subclassification were developed to give a numeric coding to each definition. An extensive process of 14 rounds of internal and external review was developed to exhaustively examine each definition, with decision-making by collective opinion (consensus). RESULTS: A Terminology Report for male LUT and pelvic floor surgery, encompassing 149 separate definitions/descriptors, has been developed. It is clinically-based with the most common diagnoses defined. Clarity and user-friendliness have been key aims to make it interpretable by practitioners and trainees in male LUT surgery. Figures have not been included to avoid any preference or bias towards a specific procedure. CONCLUSIONS: A consensus-based Terminology Report for male LUT surgery has been produced aimed at being a significant aid to clinical practice and a stimulus for research.
INTRODUCTION: In the development of terminology of the lower urinary tract (LUT), due to its increasing complexity, the terminology for male LUT surgery needs to be updated using a male-specific approach and via a clinically-based consensus report. METHODS: This report combines the input of members of the Standardization Committee of the International Continence Society in a Working Group with recognized experts in the field, assisted by many external referees. Appropriate core clinical categories and a subclassification were developed to give a numeric coding to each definition. An extensive process of 14 rounds of internal and external review was developed to exhaustively examine each definition, with decision-making by collective opinion (consensus). RESULTS: A Terminology Report for male LUT and pelvic floor surgery, encompassing 149 separate definitions/descriptors, has been developed. It is clinically-based with the most common diagnoses defined. Clarity and user-friendliness have been key aims to make it interpretable by practitioners and trainees in male LUT surgery. Figures have not been included to avoid any preference or bias towards a specific procedure. CONCLUSIONS: A consensus-based Terminology Report for male LUT surgery has been produced aimed at being a significant aid to clinical practice and a stimulus for research.