Preoperative voiding detrusor pressures do not predict stress incontinence surgery outcomes

Anna C Kirby, Charles W Nager, Heather J Litman, Mary P FitzGerald, Stephen Kraus, Peggy Norton, Larry Sirls, Leslie Rickey, Tracey Wilson, Kimberly J Dandreo, Jonathan P Shepherd, Philippe Zimmern, Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network, Anna C Kirby, Charles W Nager, Heather J Litman, Mary P FitzGerald, Stephen Kraus, Peggy Norton, Larry Sirls, Leslie Rickey, Tracey Wilson, Kimberly J Dandreo, Jonathan P Shepherd, Philippe Zimmern, Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: The aim of this study was to determine whether preoperative voiding detrusor pressures were associated with postoperative outcomes after stress incontinence surgery.

Methods: Opening detrusor pressure, detrusor pressure at maximum flow (p (det) Q(max)), and closing detrusor pressure were assessed from 280 valid preoperative urodynamic studies in subjects without advanced prolapse from a multicenter randomized trial comparing Burch and autologous fascia sling procedures. These pressures were compared between subjects with and without overall success, stress-specific success, postoperative detrusor overactivity, and postoperative urge incontinence using independent sample t tests.

Results: There were no clinically or statistically significant differences in mean preoperative voiding detrusor pressures in any comparison of postoperative outcomes.

Conclusions: We found no evidence that preoperative voiding detrusor pressures predict outcomes in women with stress predominant urinary incontinence undergoing Burch or autologous fascial sling procedures.

References

    1. Digesu GA, Khullar V, Cardozo L, Sethna F, Salvatore S. Preoperative pressure-flow studies: useful variables to predict the outcome of continence surgery. BJU Int. 2004;94:1296–1299. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2004.05160.x.
    1. Panayi DC, Duckett J, Digesu GA, Camarata M, Basu M, Khullar V. Pre-operative opening detrusor pressure is predictive of detrusor overactivity following TVT in patients with pre-operative mixed urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28:82–85. doi: 10.1002/nau.20576.
    1. Tennstedt S. Design of the stress incontinence surgical treatment efficacy trial (SISTEr) Urology. 2005;66:1213–1217. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2005.06.089.
    1. Herzog AR, Diokno AC, Fultz NH. Urinary incontinence: medical and psychosocial aspects. Annu Rev Gerontol Geriatr. 1989;9:74–119.
    1. Crystle CD, Charme LS, Copeland WE. Q-tip test in stress urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1971;38:313–315.
    1. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-Committee of the International Continence Society. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:116–126. doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.125704.
    1. Schafer W, Abrams P, Liao L, Mattiasson A, Pesce F, Spangberg A, et al. Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21:261–274. doi: 10.1002/nau.10066.
    1. Nager CW, Albo ME, Fitzgerald MP, McDermott SM, Kraus S, Richter HE, et al. Process for development of multicenter urodynamic studies. Urology. 2007;69:63–67. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.08.1118.
    1. Nager CW, Albo ME, Fitzgerald MP, McDermott S, Wruck L, Kraus S, et al. Reference urodynamic values for stress incontinent women. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26:333–340. doi: 10.1002/nau.20348.
    1. Sullivan J, Lewis P, Howell S, Williams T, Shepherd AM, Abrams P. Quality control in urodynamics: a review of urodynamic traces from one centre. BJU Int. 2003;91:201–207. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410X.2003.04054.x.
    1. Abrams P. Urodynamics. London: Springer; 2006. p. 75.
    1. Albo ME, Richter HE, Brubaker L, Norton P, Kraus SR, Zimmern PE, et al. Burch colposuspension versus fascial sling to reduce urinary stress incontinence. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:2143–2155. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa070416.
    1. Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175:10–17. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70243-0.
    1. Hintze J. (2008) PASS 2008. NCSS, LLC. Kaysville, Utah.
    1. Brubaker L, Stoddard A, Richter H, Zimmern P, Moalli P, Kraus SR, et al. Mixed incontinence: comparing definitions in women having stress incontinence surgery. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28:268–273. doi: 10.1002/nau.20698.
    1. Nager CW, FitzGerald M, Kraus SR, Chai TC, Zyczynski H, Sirls L, et al. Urodynamic measures do not predict stress continence outcomes after surgery for stress urinary incontinence in selected women. J Urol. 2008;179:1470–1474. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.077.
    1. Richter HE, Goode PS, Brubaker L, Zyczynski H, Stoddard AM, Dandreo KJ, et al. Two-year outcomes after surgery for stress urinary incontinence in older compared with younger women. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112:621–629. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31818187c2.
    1. Richter HE, Diokno A, Kenton K, Norton P, Albo M, Kraus S, et al. Predictors of treatment failure 24 months after surgery for stress urinary incontinence. J Urol. 2008;179:1024–1030. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2007.10.074.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit