Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports
Published in: Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports 3/2012

01-09-2012 | Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Evaluation of Stress Predominant Urinary Incontinence

Authors: Toby C. Chai, Stephen R. Kraus

Published in: Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports | Issue 3/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Urodynamic studies (UDS) have been used to objectively characterize a patient’s complaint of urinary incontinence. Presumably, the clinician can utilize the UDS data to guide treatment options. It is even hoped that UDS can help predict which treatments should be utilized to produce the most effective outcomes. However, is this currently the case? The Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network (UITN) has completed four large randomized clinical trials related to treatments for urinary incontinence. Two trials compared outcomes of different surgeries for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) in which standardized UDS protocols were used. Secondary analyses of these UDS data showed that UDS were neither prognostic of treatment outcomes nor correlative with severity of UI symptoms, suggesting limited utility of UDS in the evaluation and management of the uncomplicated SUI patient. A third trial was designed to answer whether a basic office examination is not noninferior to UDS in affecting SUI surgical outcomes. The results of this study are currently in press. A fourth trial examined treatment of urgency urinary incontinence (UUI). Because UDS was not part of this trial, the utility of UDS in management and treatment of UUI could not be assessed. In summary, UDS will need to undergo further refinements to increase its clinical effectiveness in the area of urinary incontinence.
Literature
1.
Albo ME, Richter HE, Brubaker L, et al. Burch colposuspension versus fascial sling to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2143–55.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Burgio KL, Kraus SR, Menefee S, et al. Behavioral therapy to enable women with urge incontinence to discontinue drug treatment: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:161–9.PubMed
3.
Richter HE, Albo ME, Zyczynski HM, et al. Retropubic versus transobturator midurethral slings for stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:2066–76.PubMedCrossRef
4.
• Nager CW, Brubaker L, Daneshgari F, et al. Design of the Value of Urodynamic Evaluation (ValUE) trial: A non-inferiority randomized trial of preoperative urodynamic investigations. Contemp Clin Trials. 2009;30:531–9. This paper is on the design of the ValUE trial, which compares basic office examination to UDS in uncomplicated SUI patients undergoing surgical treatment for their SUI. PubMedCrossRef
5.
• Steers W, Richter H, Nyberg L, et al. Challenges of conducting multi-center, multi-disciplinary urinary incontinence clinical trials: experience of the urinary incontinence treatment network. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28:170–6. This paper is a good overview of the UITN, although this publication was written at about the halfway point of the UITN existence. PubMedCrossRef
6.
Nager CW, Albo ME, Fitzgerald MP, et al. Process for development of multicenter urodynamic studies. Urology. 2007;69:63–7.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Nager CW, Albo ME, Fitzgerald MP, et al. Reference urodynamic values for stress incontinent women. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26:333–40.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Chai TC, Huang L, Kenton K, et al. Association of Baseline urodynamic measures of urethral function with clinical, demographic, and other urodynamic variables in women prior to undergoing midurethral sling surgery. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31:496–501.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Nager CW, FitzGerald M, Kraus SR, et al. Urodynamic measures do not predict stress continence outcomes after surgery for stress urinary incontinence in selected women. J Urol. 2008;179:1470–4.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Nager CW, Kraus SR, Kenton K, et al. Urodynamics, the supine empty bladder stress test, and incontinence severity. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29:1306–11.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Lemack GE, Krauss S, Litman H, et al. Normal preoperative urodynamic testing does not predict voiding dysfunction after Burch colposuspension versus pubovaginal sling. J Urol. 2008;180:2076–80.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Albo M, Wruck L, Baker J, et al. The relationships among measures of incontinence severity in women undergoing surgery for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2007;177:1810–4.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Lemack GE, Xu Y, Brubaker L, et al. Clinical and demographic factors associated with Valsalva leak point pressure among women undergoing Burch bladder neck suspension or autologous rectus fascial sling procedures. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26:392–6.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Kirby AC, Nager CW, Litman HJ, et al. Perineal surface electromyography does not typically demonstrate expected relaxation during normal voiding. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30:1591–6.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Kirby AC, Nager CW, Litman HJ, et al. Preoperative voiding detrusor pressures do not predict stress incontinence surgery outcomes. Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22:657–63.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Kraus SR, Lemack GE, Richter HE, et al. Changes in urodynamic measures two years after Burch colposuspension or autologous sling surgery. Urology. 2011;78:1263–8.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Kraus S, Lemack G, Chai T, et al. Urodynamic changes 12 months after retropubic and transobturator midurethral slings. Presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting 2011 Apr. p. e864–e864. (Journal of Urology; vol. 185, no. 4).
18.
Kraus SR, Lemack GE, Sirls LT, et al. Urodynamic changes associated with successful stress urinary incontinence surgery: is a little tension a good thing? Urology. 2011;78:1257–62.PubMedCrossRef
19.
•• Dmochowski R, Blaivas JM, Gormley EA, et al. Update of AUA guideline on the surgical management of female stress urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2010;183:1906–14. These are the AUA guidelines on surgical management of female SUI. These guidelines state that preoperative UDS is optional for female patients with uncomplicated SUI (documented by stress test) who plan to undergo surgical intervention. PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of Stress Predominant Urinary Incontinence
Authors
Toby C. Chai
Stephen R. Kraus
Publication date
01-09-2012
Publisher
Current Science Inc.
Published in
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports / Issue 3/2012
Print ISSN: 1931-7212
Electronic ISSN: 1931-7220
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-012-0140-0

Other articles of this Issue 3/2012

Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports 3/2012 Go to the issue

Voiding Dysfunction Evaluation (JT Anger, Section Editor)

Neurological Work-Up for Urge Urinary Incontinence: When and in Whom?

Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Functional Outcomes for Incontinence and Prolapse Surgery

Voiding Dysfunction Evaluation (JT Anger, Section Editor)

Evaluation of Urinary Retention in Women: Pelvic Floor Dysfunction or Primary Bladder Neck Obstruction

Invited Commentary

Stress Urinary Incontinence Treatment Using Stem Cells: Are We Close to the Future?

Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Mesh for Anterior Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Where Do We Go Now?

Stress Incontinence and Pelvic Prolapse (RR Dmochowski, Section Editor)

Patient Safety and Surgical Intervention for Urinary Incontinence and Pelvic Organ Prolapse