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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |