The correlation between clinical and urodynamic diagnosis in classifying the type of urinary incontinence in women. A systematic review of the literature

✍ Scribed by Sanne A.L. van Leijsen; Janneke S. Hoogstad-van Evert; Ben Willem J. Mol; Mark E. Vierhout; Alfred L. Milani; John P.F.A. Heesakkers; Kirsten B. Kluivers

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 2011
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 235 KB
• Volume: 30
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0733-2467
• DOI: 10.1002/nau.21047

✦ Synopsis

Abstract

Aims

To determine the reclassification rate of clinically diagnosed stress, mixed, and urge urinary incontinence after urodynamic investigation.

Methods

A systematic review of the published literature in MEDLINE and EMBASE of clinical trials among women with urinary incontinence. Studies were included in case the diagnosis based on symptoms and/or signs was compared with the diagnosis after urodynamic investigation.

Results

Twenty‐three articles involving 6,282 women with urinary incontinence met the inclusion criteria. A clinical diagnosis of stress urinary incontinence was reclassified into mixed urinary incontinence in 9% of women and into detrusor overactivity (DO) in 7% of cases. The pooled reclassification rate was highest among patients with symptoms of mixed urinary incontinence, where 46% of the patients had stress urinary incontinence and 21% had DO on urodynamic investigation. The available literature does not allow the identification of the additional value of non‐invasive test, such as stress test and voiding diary, accessory to symptoms. None of the studies had therapeutic effects as an outcome measure.

Conclusions

This review of clinical studies shows that the level of agreement between classification based on clinical evaluation and based on urodynamic investigation is poor. Urodynamic observations are regarded as gold standard, but based on the poor correlation, this assumption should be questioned. 30:495–502, 2011. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.