Advertisement

Special Considerations in the Pediatric Patient

  • J. Todd PurvesEmail author
  • Andrew A. Stec
Chapter

Abstract

Management of children presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms presents a unique challenge as their bladder function can be at any point along the spectrum of maturation; from immature infantile voiding physiology to that of an adult. Urodynamics (UDS) provides quantitative measurements of bladder function and can be of critical importance in identifying which of the myriad causes of pediatric voiding pathology may be affecting a particular patient. The most frequent use of UDS in pediatrics is in the management of children with chronic conditions, including neurogenic disorders and anatomic outlet anomalies that affect voiding physiology. These patients often require testing to define their baseline functioning and then later to assess treatment results and follow changes that occur with maturation. UDS in children also presents unique challenges such as emotional immaturity and a child’s varying ability to cooperate; additionally, with age comes changing physiology in the patient making study goals and parameters vary from adult UDS studies.

Keywords

Lower Urinary Tract Symptom Detrusor Overactivity Bladder Capacity Anorectal Malformation Posterior Urethral Valve 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Abbreviations

ALARA

As low as reasonably achievable

CMG

Cystometrogram

DSD

Detrusor sphincter dysynergia

FR

French

ICCS

International Children’s Continence Society

LUTS

Lower urinary tract symptoms

OAB

Overactive bladder

PUV

Posterior urethral valves

SFU

Society for Fetal Urology

UDS

Urodynamics

UTI

Urinary tract infection

References

  1. 1.
    Koff SA. Evaluation and management of voiding disorders in children. Urol Clin North Am. 1988;15(4):769–75. Epub 1988/11/01.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hoebeke P, Van Laecke E, Van Camp C, Raes A, Van De Walle J. One thousand video-urodynamic studies in children with non-neurogenic bladder sphincter dysfunction. BJU Int. 2001;87(6):575–80. Epub 2001/04/12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Soygur T, Arikan N, Tokatli Z, Karaboga R. The role of video-urodynamic studies in managing non-neurogenic voiding dysfunction in children. BJU Int. 2004;93(6):841–3. Epub 2004/03/31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bael A, Lax H, de Jong TP, Hoebeke P, Nijman RJ, Sixt R, et al. The relevance of urodynamic studies for urge syndrome and dysfunctional voiding: a multicenter controlled trial in children. J Urol. 2008;180(4):1486–93; discussion 94–5. Epub 2008/08/20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaufman MR, DeMarco RT, Pope 4th JC, Scarpero HM, Adams MC, Trusler LA, et al. High yield of urodynamics performed for refractory nonneurogenic dysfunctional voiding in the pediatric population. J Urol. 2006;176(4 Pt 2):1835–7. Epub 2006/09/02.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drzewiecki BA, Bauer SB. Urodynamic testing in children: indications, technique, interpretation and significance. J Urol. 2011;186(4):1190–7. Epub 2011/08/19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Neveus T, von Gontard A, Hoebeke P, Hjalmas K, Bauer S, Bower W, et al. The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function in children and adolescents: report from the Standardisation Committee of the International Children’s Continence Society. J Urol. 2006;176(1):314–24. Epub 2006/06/07.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hoebeke P, Bower W, Combs A, De Jong T, Yang S. Diagnostic evaluation of children with daytime incontinence. J Urol. 2010;183(2):699–703. Epub 2009/12/22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Acar B, Arikan FI, Germiyanoglu C, Dallar Y. Influence of high bladder pressure on vesicoureteral reflux and its resolution. Urol Int. 2009;82(1):77–80. Epub 2009/01/28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bauer SB, Neveus T, von Gontard A, Hoebeke P, Bower W, Jorgensen TM, et al. Standardizing terminology in pediatric urology. J Pediatr Urol. 2007;3(2):163. Epub 2008/10/25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edelstein RA, Bauer SB, Kelly MD, Darbey MM, Peters CA, Atala A, et al. The long-term urological response of neonates with myelodysplasia treated proactively with intermittent catheterization and anticholinergic therapy. J Urol. 1995;154(4):1500–4. Epub 1995/10/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dik P, Klijn AJ, van Gool JD, de Jong-de Vos van Steenwijk CC, de Jong TP. Early start to therapy preserves kidney function in spina bifida patients. Eur Urol. 2006;49(5):908–13. Epub 2006/02/07.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bauer SB. Neurogenic bladder: etiology and assessment. Pediatr Nephrol. 2008;23(4):541–51. Epub 2008/02/14.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peters CA, Bolkier M, Bauer SB, Hendren WH, Colodny AH, Mandell J, et al. The urodynamic consequences of posterior urethral valves. J Urol. 1990;144(1):122–6. Epub 1990/07/01.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bauer S, Labib KB, Dieppa RA, Retik AB. Urodynamic evaluation of boys with myelodysplasia and incontinence. Urology. 1977;10:354.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ghanem MA, Wolffenbuttel KP, De Vylder A, Nijman RJ. Long-term bladder dysfunction and renal function in boys with posterior urethral valves based on urodynamic findings. J Urol. 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2409–12. Epub 2004/05/06.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Podesta ML, Ruarte A, Gargiulo C, Medel R, Castera R. Urodynamic findings in boys with posterior urethral valves after treatment with primary valve ablation or vesicostomy and delayed ablation. J Urol. 2000;164(1):139–44. Epub 2000/06/07.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Holmdahl G, Sillen U, Hanson E, Hermansson G, Hjalmas K. Bladder dysfunction in boys with posterior urethral valves before and after puberty. J Urol. 1996;155(2):694–8. Epub 1996/02/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Boemers TM, Beek FJ, van Gool JD, de Jong TP, Bax KM. Urologic problems in anorectal malformations. Part 1: urodynamic findings and significance of sacral anomalies. J Pediatr Surg. 1996;31(3):407–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Boemers TM, de Jong TP, van Gool JD, Bax KM. Urologic problems in anorectal malformations. Part 2: functional urologic sequelae. J Pediatr Surg. 1996;31(5):634–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taskinen S, Valanne L, Rintala R. Effect of spinal cord abnormalities on the function of the lower urinary tract in patients with anorectal abnormalities. J Urol. 2002;168(3):1147–9. Epub 2002/08/21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    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(3):261–74. Epub 2002/04/12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Holmdahl G, Hanson E, Hanson M, Hellstrom AL, Hjalmas K, Sillen U. Four-hour voiding observation in healthy infants. J Urol. 1996;156(5):1809–12. Epub 1996/11/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Koff SA. Estimating bladder capacity in children. Urology. 1983;21(3):248. Epub 1983/03/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hjalmas K. Urodynamics in normal infants and children. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 1988;114:20–7. Epub 1988/01/01.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hjalmas K. Micturition in infants and children with normal lower urinary tract. A urodynamic study. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1976;Suppl 37:1–106. Epub 1976/01/01.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    De Jong T, Klijn AJ. Urodynamic studies in pediatric urology. Nat Rev Urol. 2009;6:585.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nijman RJ, Bower W, Butler U. Diagnosis and management of urinary incontinence and encopresis in childhood. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, editors. 3rd international consulation on incontinence. Paris: Health Publications Ltd.; 2005. p. 967–1057.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yeung CK, Godley ML, Duffy PG, Ransley PG. Natural filling cystometry in infants and children. Br J Urol. 1995;75(4):531–7. Epub 1995/04/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ghobish AG. Storage detrusor pressure in bilateral hydroureteronephrosis. Eur Urol. 2001;39(5):571–4. Epub 2001/07/21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sillen U. Bladder function in infants. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 2004;215:69–74. Epub 2004/11/17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yeung CK, Godley ML, Ho CK, Ransley PG, Duffy PG, Chen CN, et al. Some new insights into bladder function in infancy. Br J Urol. 1995;76(2):235–40. Epub 1995/08/01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gupta DK, Sankhwar SN, Goel A. Uroflowmetry nomograms for healthy children 5 to 15 years old. J Urol. 2013;190(3):1008–13. Epub 2013/03/30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Glazier DB, Murphy DP, Fleisher MH, Cummings KB, Barone JG. Evaluation of the utility of video-urodynamics in children with urinary tract infection and voiding dysfunction. Br J Urol. 1997;80(5):806–8. Epub 1997/12/11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vereecken RL, Proesmans W. Urethral instability as an important element of dysfunctional voiding. J Urol. 2000;163(2):585–8. Epub 2000/01/27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    McCormack M, Pike J, Kiruluta G. Leak point of incontinence: a measure of the interaction between outlet resistance and bladder capacity. J Urol. 1993;150(1):162–4. Epub 1993/07/01.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Furlow B. Radiation protection in pediatric imaging. Radiol Technol. 2011;82(5):421–39. Epub 2011/05/17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ngo TC, Clark CJ, Wynne C, Kennedy 2nd WA. Radiation exposure during pediatric videourodynamics. J Urol. 2011;186(4 Suppl):1672–6. Epub 2011/08/25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hsi RS, Dearn J, Dean M, Zamora DA, Kanal KM, Harper JD, et al. Effective and organ specific radiation doses from videourodynamics in children. J Urol. 2013;190(4):1364–9. Epub 2013/05/28.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ellerkmann RM, McBride AW, Dunn JS, Bent AE, Blomquist J, Kummer L, et al. A comparison of anticipatory and postprocedure pain perception in patients who undergo urodynamic procedures. Am J Ob Gyn. 2004;190:1034–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kleiber C, McCarthy AM. Parent behavior and child distress during urethral catheterization. J Soc Pediatr Nurs. 1999;4:95–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sweeney H, Marai S, Kim C, Ferrer F. Creating a sedation service for pediatric urodynamics: our experience. Urol Nurs. 2008;28(4):273–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bozkurt P, Killic N, Kaya G, Yeker Y, Elicevik M, Soylet Y. The effects of intranasal midazolam on urodynamic studies in children. Br J Urol. 1996;78(2):282–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Theravaja A, Batra Y, Rao K, Chhabra M, Aggarwal M. Comparison of low-dose ketamine to midazolam for sedation during pediatric urodynamic study. Paediatr Anaesth. 2013;23(5):415–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    de Kort L, Nesselaar C, van Gool J, de Jong T. The influence of colonic enema irrigation on urodynamic findings in patients with neurogenic bladder dysfunction. Br J Urol. 1997;80(5):731–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pediatrics AAO. Patient- and family- centered care and the pediatrician’s role. Pediatrics. 2012;129(2):394–404.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Smith A, Ferlise V, Wein A, Ramchandani P, Rovner E. Effect of A 7-F transurethral catheter on abdominal leak point pressure measurement in men with post-prostatectomy incontinence. Urology. 2011;77(5):1188–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyThe Medical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA

Personalised recommendations