Prevalence of Detrusor Underactivity and Bladder Outlet Obstruction in Female Without Cystocele

December 4, 2019 updated by: National Taiwan University Hospital

Urodynamically Age-specific Prevalence of Detrusor Underactivity and Bladder Outlet Obstruction in Female Voiding Dysfunction Without Cystocele

Women with symptoms of voiding dysfunction may be associated with detrusor underactivity (DU) or bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). The treatment strategies are different between DU and BOO. In general, urodynamic/videourodynamic studies are important for differential diagnosis. However, urodynamic/videourodynamic studies are invasive. The investigators are interested in whether there were specific symptoms or measurements that can be used for initial differential diagnosis between DU and BOO. Thus, the aim of this study was to elucidate the prevalence of DU and BOO in each age group and elucidate the clinical and urodynamic differences between the DU, BOO and non-DU/BOO groups.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Between April 1996 and September 2018, all women with symptoms of voiding dysfunction who visited the urogynecological department of a medical center for urodynamic evaluation were reviewed. Those women who have no complete data of maximum flow rate (Qmax), voided volume, post-void residual volume (PVR) and detrusor pressure at a maximum flow rate (PdetQmax) were excluded from this study. Besides, women with cystocele were also excluded. The DU was defined when the PdetQmax was less than 20 cmH2O, the Qmax was less than 15 mL/s, and the bladder voiding efficiency (BVE) was less than 90 %. The BOO was defined when the PdetQmax was not less than 40 cmH2O, and the Qmax was less than 12 mL/s. BVE = voided volume / (voided volume+ PVR) x 100%. Those women without DU or BOO were allocated to the non-DU/BOO group.

STATA software was used for statistical analysis. ANOVA test with Bonferroni correction or chi-square test was used for statistical analysis as appropriate. Linear regression analysis with age adjustment was used to assess the adjusted effect of variables. P < 0.05 was considered as statistical significant.

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

602

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Taiwan
      • Taipei, Taiwan, 100
        • National Taiwan University Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

20 years to 85 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

All women with symptoms of voiding dysfunction and without cystocele who visited the urogynecological department of a medical center for urodynamic evaluation were reviewed.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Women with symptoms of voiding dysfunction.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Cystocele
  • Those women who have no complete data of maximum flow rate (Qmax), voided volume, post void residual volume (PVR) and detrusor pressure at maximum flow rate (PdetQmax) were excluded from this study.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Case-Only
  • Time Perspectives: Retrospective

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
Intervention / Treatment
Detrusor underactivity
The DU was defined when the PdetQmax was less than 20 cmH2O, the Qmax was less than 15 mL/s, and the bladder voiding efficiency (BVE) was less than 90 %. BVE = voided volume / (voided volume+ PVR) x 100%.
Diagnostic test: Urodynamic study
The urodynamic assessment included uroflowmetry, filling cystometry with 35°C distilled water at a rate of 60 mL/sec, a pressure flow study, and a stress urethral pressure profile with patient in sitting position [14]. A 20-minute pad test for each woman was also performed [15, 16]. Multichannel urodynamic equipment (Life-Tech, Houston, TX, USA) with computer analysis and Urovision (Urolab Janus System V, Houston) was used. All terminology conformed to the standards recommended by the ICS [3]. All procedures were performed by an experienced technician, and the data were interpreted by a single observer to avoid interobserver variability.
Other Names:
  • Pad test
Bladder outlet obstruction
The BOO was defined when the PdetQmax was not less than 40 cmH2O, and the Qmax was less than 12 mL/s.
Diagnostic test: Urodynamic study
The urodynamic assessment included uroflowmetry, filling cystometry with 35°C distilled water at a rate of 60 mL/sec, a pressure flow study, and a stress urethral pressure profile with patient in sitting position [14]. A 20-minute pad test for each woman was also performed [15, 16]. Multichannel urodynamic equipment (Life-Tech, Houston, TX, USA) with computer analysis and Urovision (Urolab Janus System V, Houston) was used. All terminology conformed to the standards recommended by the ICS [3]. All procedures were performed by an experienced technician, and the data were interpreted by a single observer to avoid interobserver variability.
Other Names:
  • Pad test
Non-DU/BOO group
Those women without DU or BOO were allocated to the non-DU/BOO group.
Diagnostic test: Urodynamic study
The urodynamic assessment included uroflowmetry, filling cystometry with 35°C distilled water at a rate of 60 mL/sec, a pressure flow study, and a stress urethral pressure profile with patient in sitting position [14]. A 20-minute pad test for each woman was also performed [15, 16]. Multichannel urodynamic equipment (Life-Tech, Houston, TX, USA) with computer analysis and Urovision (Urolab Janus System V, Houston) was used. All terminology conformed to the standards recommended by the ICS [3]. All procedures were performed by an experienced technician, and the data were interpreted by a single observer to avoid interobserver variability.
Other Names:
  • Pad test

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of Participants with Detrusor underactivity or Bladder outlet obstruction
Time Frame: Between April 1996 and September 2018
The DU was defined when the PdetQmax was less than 20 cmH2O, the Qmax was less than 15 mL/s, and the bladder voiding efficiency (BVE) was less than 90 %. The BOO was defined when the PdetQmax was not less than 40 cmH2O, and the Qmax was less than 12 mL/s. BVE = voided volume / (voided volume+ PVR) x 100%.
Between April 1996 and September 2018

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

National Taiwan University Hospital

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

April 1, 1996

Primary Completion (Actual)

September 30, 2018

Study Completion (Actual)

September 30, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 28, 2019

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 28, 2019

First Posted (Actual)

December 4, 2019

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

December 9, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 4, 2019

Last Verified

August 1, 2019

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 201907011RINC

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

IPD Plan Description

There is no plan to make IPD available to other researchers.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Voiding Disorders

Clinical Trials on Urodynamic study

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Lebanon

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Subscribe