Chester Jonathan, Toozs-Hobson Philip, Israfil-Bayli Fidan
Birmingham City Hospital, Dudley Road, Birmingham, B18 7QH, UK.
Birmingham Women's Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Mindelsohn Way, Birmingham, B15 2TG, UK.
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Mar;27(3):381-6. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2817-3. Epub 2015 Aug 28.
Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) impact upon quality of life and occur in women of all ages. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence states that ambulatory urodynamic monitoring (AUM) should be used as a second-line investigational modality; however, its use is becoming more frequent. AUM provides a valid second line to conventional urodynamic methods that may be more widely used.
A literature review was undertaken to assess evidence for the use of AUM alongside a retrospective review of patients undergoing AUM at a tertiary care centre and symptom reporting at a follow-up visit. Both these methods included evidence for pathology detection, technical ease of use, recreation of symptoms and patient experience, allowing comparison of literature results to those experienced in day-to-day use.
The literature shows AUM to have sensitivity superior to that of other urodynamic investigations. However, evidence suggests this correlates less well with clinical effectiveness. Patients felt AUM was superior in recreating their symptoms, and they tolerated the procedure well. The increased technical demands of AUMs, however, meant that traces were more commonly harder to interpret than with conventional urodynamics. Our experience correlates well with the existing literature, suggesting increased symptom diagnosis; 63.2 % of diagnoses correlated well with symptoms.
AUM remains an important urodynamic method to supplement conventional urodynamics. Evidence suggests it is superior in LUTS diagnosis, but its technical difficulty can affect results.
下尿路症状(LUTS)会影响生活质量,且在各年龄段女性中均有发生。英国国家临床优化研究所指出,动态尿动力学监测(AUM)应作为二线检查手段;然而,其使用频率正日益增加。AUM为传统尿动力学方法提供了一种有效的二线补充手段,而传统尿动力学方法可能应用更为广泛。
进行了一项文献综述,以评估使用AUM的证据,并对一家三级护理中心接受AUM检查的患者进行回顾性分析,以及在随访时进行症状报告。这两种方法均包括病理检测、技术易用性、症状再现和患者体验等方面的证据,从而能够将文献结果与日常使用中的实际情况进行比较。
文献表明,AUM的敏感性优于其他尿动力学检查。然而,有证据显示,这与临床有效性的相关性较差。患者认为AUM在再现其症状方面更具优势,且对该检查的耐受性良好。然而,AUM对技术要求更高,这意味着与传统尿动力学相比,其记录结果更难解读。我们的经验与现有文献高度相符,表明症状诊断有所增加;63.2%的诊断与症状高度相关。
AUM仍然是补充传统尿动力学的一种重要尿动力学方法。有证据表明,它在LUTS诊断方面更具优势,但其技术难度可能会影响结果。