Housley Sarah L, Harding Chris, Pickard Robert
Department of Urology, Freeman Hospital, Freeman Road, High Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE7 7DN, UK.
Indian J Urol. 2010 Apr;26(2):215-20. doi: 10.4103/0970-1591.65392.
Urodynamic evaluation in the assessment of women complaining of urinary incontinence remains controversial with recent UK National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidance maintaining that it is unnecessary prior to surgery for women with a primarily stress leakage. Other experts contend it should be part of routine preoperative assessment since it establishes a diagnosis, allows more careful patient counseling and predicts surgical outcome.
To summarize current literature to define the evidence level on which these conflicting opinions are based.
A systematic literature search was performed and retrieved publications summarized in a narrative evidence review using both original papers and previous reviews.
Five hundred and one primary research papers and 65 previous reviews were retrieved. The findings were summarized in a narrative comprising overview, description of methods of bladder and urethral pressure measurement, and a summary of the literature concerning four key questions.
The level of evidence was low regarding answering each of the questions posed, preventing firm conclusions. Urodynamic findings do correlate with relevant symptoms and, to some extent, with symptom severity, giving reasonable diagnostic accuracy. There is no reliable evidence that preoperative urodynamic diagnosis improves outcome from surgery for stress incontinence although it is likely to facilitate preoperative discussion. Tests to differentiate sphincter deficiency and urethral hypermobility are not currently recommended due to poor validity and reproducibility. This along with the current use of mid-urethral tapes as the universal primary surgical procedure means differentiation is not a necessity. Preoperative diagnosis of detrusor overactivity does not appear to worsen surgical outcome in women with a primary symptom of stress leakage. Large, well-designed prospective studies are now underway to provide a definitive answer to these questions.
在评估主诉尿失禁的女性时,尿动力学评估仍存在争议。英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所最近的指南认为,对于主要存在压力性漏尿的女性,术前进行尿动力学评估并无必要。其他专家则认为,它应作为常规术前评估的一部分,因为它能确立诊断、便于更仔细地向患者提供咨询并预测手术结果。
总结当前文献,以确定这些相互矛盾的观点所基于的证据水平。
进行了系统的文献检索,并使用原始论文和先前的综述对检索到的出版物进行叙述性证据综述总结。
检索到501篇原发性研究论文和65篇先前的综述。研究结果在一篇叙述中进行了总结,包括概述、膀胱和尿道压力测量方法的描述,以及有关四个关键问题的文献综述。
对于所提出的每个问题,证据水平都很低,无法得出确凿结论。尿动力学检查结果确实与相关症状相关,并且在一定程度上与症状严重程度相关,具有合理的诊断准确性。没有可靠证据表明术前尿动力学诊断能改善压力性尿失禁手术的结果,尽管它可能有助于术前讨论。由于有效性和可重复性较差,目前不建议进行区分括约肌功能不全和尿道活动过度的检查。这一点以及目前普遍将中段尿道吊带术作为主要手术方法意味着无需进行区分。对于主要症状为压力性漏尿的女性,术前诊断逼尿肌过度活动似乎不会使手术结果恶化。目前正在进行大型、设计良好的前瞻性研究,以对这些问题给出明确答案。