Cargando…

The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to explore whether urodynamics, with the addition of ambulatory urodynamic study (ambulatory-UDS), will be able to better predict and assess sacral neuromodulation (SNM) treatment outcome. Selection of patients is a critical element in achieving optimal outcome in S...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Drossaerts, Jamie, Rademakers, Kevin, van Koeveringe, Gommert, Van Kerrebroeck, Philip
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4617837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25680936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1479-6
_version_ 1782396844413812736
author Drossaerts, Jamie
Rademakers, Kevin
van Koeveringe, Gommert
Van Kerrebroeck, Philip
author_facet Drossaerts, Jamie
Rademakers, Kevin
van Koeveringe, Gommert
Van Kerrebroeck, Philip
author_sort Drossaerts, Jamie
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to explore whether urodynamics, with the addition of ambulatory urodynamic study (ambulatory-UDS), will be able to better predict and assess sacral neuromodulation (SNM) treatment outcome. Selection of patients is a critical element in achieving optimal outcome in SNM. Quantitative and qualitative results of urodynamic tests are used to justify surgical therapy and to evaluate treatment for lower urinary tract dysfunction. Therefore, these tests should be representative and subsequently offer a correct prognosis. METHODS: Between December 2002 until May 2013 selected patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (storage and/or voiding dysfunction) were included in an ambulatory urodynamic measurement database. From this database, the total subgroup of patients that underwent a sacral neuromodulation test evaluation was selected. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients were included. Success rate of SNM in patients with storage dysfunction was around 70 %, according to either conventional-UDS or ambulatory-UDS diagnosis. Based on conventional-UDS, success rate of SNM in patients with hypocontractility was 67 % and in acontractile patients 35 %. According to ambulatory-UDS diagnosis, success rates were 32 and 17 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that conventional-UDS overestimates the amount of patients diagnosed with hypocontractile or acontractile bladder. Patients with reduced contractility on ambulatory-UDS have a lower chance of SNM success. Hence, ambulatory-UDS allows us to select patients with a real acontractile bladder and predict SNM failure. In patients with storage dysfunction, additional ambulatory-UDS does not seem to contribute in predicting SNM outcome.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4617837
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46178372015-10-28 The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation Drossaerts, Jamie Rademakers, Kevin van Koeveringe, Gommert Van Kerrebroeck, Philip World J Urol Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to explore whether urodynamics, with the addition of ambulatory urodynamic study (ambulatory-UDS), will be able to better predict and assess sacral neuromodulation (SNM) treatment outcome. Selection of patients is a critical element in achieving optimal outcome in SNM. Quantitative and qualitative results of urodynamic tests are used to justify surgical therapy and to evaluate treatment for lower urinary tract dysfunction. Therefore, these tests should be representative and subsequently offer a correct prognosis. METHODS: Between December 2002 until May 2013 selected patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (storage and/or voiding dysfunction) were included in an ambulatory urodynamic measurement database. From this database, the total subgroup of patients that underwent a sacral neuromodulation test evaluation was selected. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients were included. Success rate of SNM in patients with storage dysfunction was around 70 %, according to either conventional-UDS or ambulatory-UDS diagnosis. Based on conventional-UDS, success rate of SNM in patients with hypocontractility was 67 % and in acontractile patients 35 %. According to ambulatory-UDS diagnosis, success rates were 32 and 17 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that conventional-UDS overestimates the amount of patients diagnosed with hypocontractile or acontractile bladder. Patients with reduced contractility on ambulatory-UDS have a lower chance of SNM success. Hence, ambulatory-UDS allows us to select patients with a real acontractile bladder and predict SNM failure. In patients with storage dysfunction, additional ambulatory-UDS does not seem to contribute in predicting SNM outcome. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2015-02-14 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4617837/ /pubmed/25680936 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1479-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Drossaerts, Jamie
Rademakers, Kevin
van Koeveringe, Gommert
Van Kerrebroeck, Philip
The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation
title The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation
title_full The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation
title_fullStr The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation
title_full_unstemmed The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation
title_short The value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation
title_sort value of urodynamic tools to guide patient selection in sacral neuromodulation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4617837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25680936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1479-6
work_keys_str_mv AT drossaertsjamie thevalueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation
AT rademakerskevin thevalueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation
AT vankoeveringegommert thevalueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation
AT vankerrebroeckphilip thevalueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation
AT drossaertsjamie valueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation
AT rademakerskevin valueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation
AT vankoeveringegommert valueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation
AT vankerrebroeckphilip valueofurodynamictoolstoguidepatientselectioninsacralneuromodulation