Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Practical Urology: Essential Principles and Practice pp 261–282Cite as

Overview of the Evaluation of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Springer Specialist Surgery Series ((SPECIALIST))

Abstract

The idea “the bladder is an unreliable witness” first came into existence with the recognition that lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were not disease or gender specific, could be reported inaccurately by the patient, or could be poorly documented by the investigator.1 In recent years, attempts have been made to quantify symptoms by the use of disease-specific symptom scores and quality of life measures. Well-known examples include the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) for suspected prostate and the King’s Health Questionnaire for incontinence-related problems. Currently, internationally acceptable questionnaires are being evaluated for incontinence.2

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Chapple CR, Roehrborn CG. A shifted paradigm for the further understanding, evaluation, and treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men: focus on the bladder. Eur Urol. 2006;49(4):651-659

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. www.iciq.net/. 2009

  3. Griffiths D, Tadic SD. Bladder control, urgency, and urge incontinence: evidence from functional brain imaging. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(6):466-474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Addla S, Adeyouju A, Neilson D. Assessment of reliability of 1-day, 3-day and 7-day frequency volume charts. Eur Urol Suppl. 2004;2:30

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lose G, Rosenkilde P, Gammelgaard J, Schroeder T. Pad-weighing test performed with standardized bladder volume. Urology. 1988;32:78-80

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kromann-Andersen B, Jakobsen H, Andersen JT. Pad-weighing tests: a literature survey on test accuracy and reproducibility. Neurourol Urodyn. 1989;8:237-242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jorgensen L, Lose G, Thunedborg P. Diagnosis of mild stress incontinence in females: 24-hour pad weighing test versus the one-hour test. Neurourol Urodyn. 1987; 6:165-166

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gilleran JP, Zimmern P. An evidence-based approach to the evaluation and management of stress incontinence in women. Curr Opin Urol. 2005;15:236-243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Goode PS, Locher JL, Bryant RL, Roth DL, Burgio KL. Measurement of postvoid residual urine with portable transabdominal bladder ultrasound scanner and urethral catheterization. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2000;11:296-300

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Weber AM, Taylor RJ, Wei JT, Lemack G, Piedmonte MR, Walters MD. The cost-effectiveness of preoperative testing (basic office assessment vs. urodynamics) for stress urinary incontinence in women. BJU Int. 2002;89: 356-363

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Weidner AC, Myers ER, Visco AG, Cundiff GW, Bump RC. Which women with stress incontinence require urodynamic evaluation? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;184:20-27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Abrams P. Urodynamics. London: Springer-Verlag; 1997

    Google Scholar 

  13. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. Clinical practice guideline: urinary incontinence in adults. Rockville MDOHAHSUAFHCPAR, editor. AHCPR Pub. No. 96-0682. 1996

    Google Scholar 

  14. Digesu GA, Khullar V, Cardozo L, Salvatore S. Overactive bladder symptoms: do we need urodynamics? Neurourol Urodyn. 2003;22:105-108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Showalter PR, Zimmern PE, Roehrborn CG, Lemack GE. Standing cystourethrogram: an outcome measure after anti-incontinence procedures and cystocele repair in women. Urology. 2001;58:33-37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Zimmern P, Lemack G. Voiding cystourethrography and magnetic resonance imaging of the lower urinary tract. In: Corcos I, Schick E, eds. The Urinary Sphincter. Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York; 2001:407-421

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hilton P, Stanton SL. Urethral pressure measurement by microtransducer: the results in symptom-free women and in those with genuine stress incontinence. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1983;90:919-933

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bump RC, Norton PA, Zinner NR, Yalcin I. Mixed urinary incontinence symptoms: urodynamic findings, incontinence severity, and treatment response. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102:76-83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21:167-178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Homma Y. The clinical significance of the urodynamic investigation in incontinence. BJU Int. 2002;90:489-497

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Petrou SP, Broderick GA. Valsalva leak-point pressure changes after successful and failed suburethral sling. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002;13:299-302

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Chapple CR, MacDiarmid SA, Patel A. Urodynamics Made Easy. 3rd ed. Edinburgh, UK: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2009

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield, UK

    Christopher R. Chapple & Altaf Mangera

Authors
  1. Christopher R. Chapple
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Altaf Mangera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Urology, J Floor, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield, S10 2JF, United Kingdom

    Christopher R. Chapple

  2. Dept. Urology, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virgin Islands, USA

    William D. Steers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chapple, C.R., Mangera, A. (2011). Overview of the Evaluation of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction. In: Chapple, C., Steers, W. (eds) Practical Urology: Essential Principles and Practice. Springer Specialist Surgery Series. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-034-0_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84882-034-0_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84882-033-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84882-034-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation