MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1056/nejmoa1113595

Медицинская библиотека · The New England journal of medicine · 2012

A randomized trial of urodynamic testing before stress-incontinence surgery.

Nager Charles W, Brubaker Linda, Litman Heather J, Zyczynski Halina M, Varner R Edward, Amundsen Cindy, Sirls Larry T, Norton Peggy A, Arisco Amy M, Chai Toby C, Zimmern Philippe, Barber Matthew D, Dandreo Kimberly J, Menefee Shawn A, Kenton Kimberly, Lowder Jerry, Richter Holly E, Khandwala Salil, Nygaard Ingrid, Kraus Stephen R, Johnson Harry W, Lemack Gary E, Mihova Marina, Albo Michael E, Mueller Elizabeth, Sutkin Gary, Wilson Tracey S, Hsu Yvonne, Rozanski Thomas A, Rickey Leslie M, Rahn David, Tennstedt Sharon, Kusek John W, Gormley E Ann, Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network

СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Urodynamic studies are commonly performed in women before surgery for stress urinary incontinence, but there is no good evidence that they improve outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial involving women with uncomplicated, demonstrable stress urinary incontinence to compare outcomes after preoperative office evaluation and urodynamic tests or evaluation only. The primary outcome was treatment success at 12 months, defined as a reduction in the score on the Urogenital Distress Inventory of 70% or more and a response of "much better" or "very much better" on the Patient Global Impression of Improvement. The predetermined noninferiority margin was 11 percentage points.

RESULTS

A total of 630 women were randomly assigned to undergo office evaluation with urodynamic tests or evaluation only (315 per group); the proportion in whom treatment was successful was 76.9% in the urodynamic-testing group versus 77.2% in the evaluation-only group (difference, -0.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -7.5 to 6.9), which was consistent with noninferiority. There were no significant between-group differences in secondary measures of incontinence severity, quality of life, patient satisfaction, rates of positive provocative stress tests, voiding dysfunction, or adverse events. Women who underwent urodynamic tests were significantly less likely to receive a diagnosis of overactive bladder and more likely to receive a diagnosis of voiding-phase dysfunction, but these changes did not lead to significant between-group differences in treatment selection or outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

For women with uncomplicated, demonstrable stress urinary incontinence, preoperative office evaluation alone was not inferior to evaluation with urodynamic testing for outcomes at 1 year. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00803959.).

Для цитирования: Nager Charles W, Brubaker Linda, Litman Heather J, Zyczynski Halina M, Varner R Edward, Amundsen Cindy, Sirls Larry T, Norton Peggy A, Arisco Amy M, Chai Toby C, Zimmern Philippe, Barber Matthew D, Dandreo Kimberly J, Menefee Shawn A, Kenton Kimberly, Lowder Jerry, Richter Holly E, Khandwala Salil, Nygaard Ingrid, Kraus Stephen R, Johnson Harry W, Lemack Gary E, Mihova Marina, Albo Michael E, Mueller Elizabeth, Sutkin Gary, Wilson Tracey S, Hsu Yvonne, Rozanski Thomas A, Rickey Leslie M, Rahn David, Tennstedt Sharon, Kusek John W, Gormley E Ann, Urinary Incontinence Treatment Network. A randomized trial of urodynamic testing before stress-incontinence surgery.. The New England journal of medicine. 2012. DOI: 10.1056/nejmoa1113595.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.