ICS 1999, Denver
Informally discussed posters
Urodynamics
A comparison of urodynamic and clinical parameters in the assessment of urinary tract disorders

U. Azam, R.P. Assassa, K. Williams et al
Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, University of Leicester, Leicester, England, UK

Aims of Study: Urodynamics, Frequency-Volume charts (FVC) and Pad test Measurements have all been used to assess the severity of urinary tract disorders. It has been suggested that urodynamic studies are mandatory as a disease outcome measurement within clinical trials. However, it is unclear whether there is any relationship between clinical and urodynamic measurements. We have therefore investigated this.

Methods: 120 patients (27 men and 93 women, mean age 61.1 years, SD 11.09) underwent standardised filling cystometry with fluid filled catheters at fill rate of 100 mls/min using normal saline at room temperature. First, strong, urgent desires to void and maximum cystometric capacity were recorded during filling cystometry. These patients had previously performed a 24hr home pad test and completed a 3 day FVC as part of a community based trial investigating Continence Nurse treatment of urinary dysfunction.

Measured urine loss, Functional bladder capacity, Mean voided volume, Mean day and nighttime frequencies, Mean 24 hr frequency and number of Incontinent episodes were compared with the urodynamic measurements using correlation analysis.

Results: There was no significant correlation between clinical measurements of patient's severity in their normal environment (pad test and FVC) and any of the urodynamic parameters.

Conclusions: There seems to be little relationship between urodynamic and clinical measurements of severity. As clinical measurements inform us of a patients condition within their normal physiological environment it is questionable as to what extra information repeat urodynamics provide in clinical trials.