Do Symptoms Predict Ambulatory Urodynamic Diagnosis In Patients With Non-Diagnostic Baseline Urodynamics?

Guzelburc V1, Axell R G1, Duffy M1, Yasmin H1, O'Connor E1, Pakzad M H1, Hamid R1, Ockrim J L1, Greenwell T J1

Research Type

Clinical

Abstract Category

Urodynamics

Abstract 741
Non Discussion Abstracts
Scientific Non Discussion Abstract Session 36
Urodynamics Equipment Urodynamics Techniques Urgency/Frequency Urgency Urinary Incontinence Stress Urinary Incontinence
1. UCLH NHS Foundation Trust
Links

Abstract

Hypothesis / aims of study 
To correlate ambulatory urodynamic diagnosis with symptoms in patients with non−diagnostic baseline urodynamics.
Study design, materials and methods 
The symptoms and urodynamic findings of 84 consecutive patients of median age 50.5 years having ambulatory urodynamics between 1st January 2015 and 31st December 2015 were reviewed and compared.
Results 
Symptoms were not significantly different between diagnostic categories (Table 1). One urodynamic diagnosis was made in 41 patients (49%), 2 in 34 patients (41%) and 3 in 7 patients (8%). 2 (2%) patients were diagnosed as having ‘normal’ ambulatory urodynamics.
Interpretation of results 
Symptoms are unhelpful and non-specific when compared to the definitive urodynamic and clinical diagnosis following ambulatory urodynamic assessment.
Concluding message 
Symptoms are unhelpful and non-specific, whereas, ambulatory urodynamics provided a definitive diagnosis in 98% of patients − 48% of whom have DO.
Figure 1
Disclosures
Funding None Clinical Trial No Subjects Human Ethics not Req'd Retrospective audit of clinical data Helsinki Yes Informed Consent No
24/04/2024 06:06:21