Cargando…

Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity

INTRODUCTION: There is a multiplicity of treatments currently available for patients with symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity (SRU IDO). We have assessed patient treatment preferences and their outcomes over a 12-month period from January 1 2009 to December 31 2009. PA...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fontaine, Christina L., Rudd, Ian, Pakzad, Mahreen, Hamid, Rizwan, Ockrim, Jeremy L., Greenwell, Tamsin J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5532892/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28794591
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_172_16
_version_ 1783253534741889024
author Fontaine, Christina L.
Rudd, Ian
Pakzad, Mahreen
Hamid, Rizwan
Ockrim, Jeremy L.
Greenwell, Tamsin J.
author_facet Fontaine, Christina L.
Rudd, Ian
Pakzad, Mahreen
Hamid, Rizwan
Ockrim, Jeremy L.
Greenwell, Tamsin J.
author_sort Fontaine, Christina L.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: There is a multiplicity of treatments currently available for patients with symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity (SRU IDO). We have assessed patient treatment preferences and their outcomes over a 12-month period from January 1 2009 to December 31 2009. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective database of all patients with SRU IDO was reviewed for patient demographics, treatment preference, and outcome. All patients attending for treatment in the time period were offered: no further treatment, repeat bladder training ± antimuscarinic (BT ± AM), acupuncture, intravesical botulinum toxin injection, sacral neuromodulation (SNM), clam cystoplasty ± Mitrofanoff channel formation, and ileal conduit. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Statistical analysis of outcomes was done by Chi–square test, and statistical significance was determined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients with SRU IDO underwent primary treatment in this time period, with a median age of 56 years and follow-up for a minimum of 12 months' posttreatment to determine outcome. No patients opted for any further treatment or an ileal conduit. The majority of patients opted for intravesical botulinum toxin injections and SNM with similar success rates (approximately 70%). A small number of patients decided to have nonsurgical interventions (BT ± AM or acupuncture) and had a broadly similar success rate (50%). A minority opted for clam cystoplasty ± Mitrofanoff channel formation – this group reported the highest success rate at 86%. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment options in SRU IDO are diverse, with the majority of patients opting for minimally invasive surgery. Clinicians should be familiar with all treatment options for management of SRU IDO.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5532892
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55328922017-08-09 Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity Fontaine, Christina L. Rudd, Ian Pakzad, Mahreen Hamid, Rizwan Ockrim, Jeremy L. Greenwell, Tamsin J. Urol Ann Original Article INTRODUCTION: There is a multiplicity of treatments currently available for patients with symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity (SRU IDO). We have assessed patient treatment preferences and their outcomes over a 12-month period from January 1 2009 to December 31 2009. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective database of all patients with SRU IDO was reviewed for patient demographics, treatment preference, and outcome. All patients attending for treatment in the time period were offered: no further treatment, repeat bladder training ± antimuscarinic (BT ± AM), acupuncture, intravesical botulinum toxin injection, sacral neuromodulation (SNM), clam cystoplasty ± Mitrofanoff channel formation, and ileal conduit. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Statistical analysis of outcomes was done by Chi–square test, and statistical significance was determined as P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients with SRU IDO underwent primary treatment in this time period, with a median age of 56 years and follow-up for a minimum of 12 months' posttreatment to determine outcome. No patients opted for any further treatment or an ileal conduit. The majority of patients opted for intravesical botulinum toxin injections and SNM with similar success rates (approximately 70%). A small number of patients decided to have nonsurgical interventions (BT ± AM or acupuncture) and had a broadly similar success rate (50%). A minority opted for clam cystoplasty ± Mitrofanoff channel formation – this group reported the highest success rate at 86%. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment options in SRU IDO are diverse, with the majority of patients opting for minimally invasive surgery. Clinicians should be familiar with all treatment options for management of SRU IDO. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5532892/ /pubmed/28794591 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_172_16 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Urology Annals http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Fontaine, Christina L.
Rudd, Ian
Pakzad, Mahreen
Hamid, Rizwan
Ockrim, Jeremy L.
Greenwell, Tamsin J.
Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity
title Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity
title_full Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity
title_fullStr Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity
title_full_unstemmed Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity
title_short Patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity
title_sort patient treatment preferences for symptomatic refractory urodynamic idiopathic detrusor overactivity
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5532892/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28794591
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/UA.UA_172_16
work_keys_str_mv AT fontainechristinal patienttreatmentpreferencesforsymptomaticrefractoryurodynamicidiopathicdetrusoroveractivity
AT ruddian patienttreatmentpreferencesforsymptomaticrefractoryurodynamicidiopathicdetrusoroveractivity
AT pakzadmahreen patienttreatmentpreferencesforsymptomaticrefractoryurodynamicidiopathicdetrusoroveractivity
AT hamidrizwan patienttreatmentpreferencesforsymptomaticrefractoryurodynamicidiopathicdetrusoroveractivity
AT ockrimjeremyl patienttreatmentpreferencesforsymptomaticrefractoryurodynamicidiopathicdetrusoroveractivity
AT greenwelltamsinj patienttreatmentpreferencesforsymptomaticrefractoryurodynamicidiopathicdetrusoroveractivity