Rademakers Kevin, Drake Marcus J, Gammie Andrew, Djurhuus Jens C, Rosier Peter F W M, Abrams Paul, Harding Christopher
Department of Urology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Bristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Neurourol Urodyn. 2017 Apr;36(4):894-901. doi: 10.1002/nau.23178.
The diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in the male is dependent on measurements of pressure and flow made during urodynamic studies. The procedure of urodynamics and the indices used to delineate BOO are well standardized largely as a result of the work of the International Continence Society. The clinical utility of the diagnosis of BOO is however, less well defined and there are several shortcomings and gaps in the currently available medical literature. Consequently the International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society (ICI-RS) held a think tank session in 2015 entitled "Male bladder outlet obstruction: Time to re-evaluate the definition and reconsider our diagnostic pathway?" This manuscript details the discussions that took place within that think tank setting out the pros and cons of the current definition of BOO and exploring alternative clinical tests (alone or in combination) which may be useful in the future investigation of male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. The think tank panel concluded that pressure-flow studies remain the diagnostic gold-standard for BOO although there is still a lack of high quality evidence. Newer, less invasive, investigations have shown promise in terms of diagnostic accuracy for BOO but similar criticisms can be levelled against these tests. Therefore, the think tank suggests further research with regard to these alternative indicators to determine their clinical utility.
男性膀胱出口梗阻(BOO)的诊断依赖于尿动力学检查期间的压力和流量测量。尿动力学检查程序以及用于界定BOO的指标在很大程度上已得到很好的标准化,这主要归功于国际尿控协会的工作。然而,BOO诊断的临床实用性定义尚不明确,目前可用的医学文献存在若干缺点和空白。因此,国际尿失禁研究学会(ICI-RS)在2015年举办了一次智囊团会议,题为“男性膀胱出口梗阻:是时候重新评估定义并重新考虑我们的诊断途径了?” 本手稿详细介绍了在该智囊团会议上进行的讨论,阐述了BOO当前定义的利弊,并探索了可能有助于未来对患有下尿路症状男性患者进行调查的替代临床检查(单独或联合使用)。智囊团小组得出结论,尽管仍然缺乏高质量证据,但压力-流量研究仍然是BOO的诊断金标准。更新的、侵入性较小的检查在BOO诊断准确性方面已显示出前景,但这些检查也可能受到类似的批评。因此,智囊团建议对这些替代指标进行进一步研究,以确定其临床实用性。