English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

and hypothesis There is still no consensus on definitions of detrusor underactivity; therefore, it is difficult to estimate the prevalence. The primary objective of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of detrusor underactivity in a cohort of patients with pelvic floor disorders according to different proposed urodynamics definitions. The secondary objectives were to estimate the association between detrusor underactivity and symptoms, anatomy and urodynamic findings and to build predictive models. Methods Patients who performed urodynamic evaluation for pelvic floor disorders between 2008 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Detrusor underactivity was evaluated according to Schafer’s detrusor factor, Abrams’ bladder contractility index and Jeong cut-offs. The degree of concordance between each method was measured with Cohenʼs kappa, and differences were tested using Student’s t test, Wilcoxon test and Pearson’s chi-squared test. Results The prevalence of detrusor underactivity among a cohort of 2092 women, concerning the three urodynamic definitions, was 33.7%, 37.0% and 4.1%, respectively. Age, menopausal status, voiding/bulging symptoms, anterior and central prolapse, first desire to void and positive postvoid residual were directly related to detrusor underactivity. Conversely, stress urinary incontinence, detrusor pressures during voiding and maximum flow were inversely associated. Final models for detrusor underactivity resulted in poor accuracy for all considered definitions. Conclusions The prevalence of detrusor underactivity varies depending on the definition considered. Although several clinical variables resulted as independent predictors of detrusor underactivity, instrumental evaluation still plays a key role in the diagnosis.

Detrusor underactivity prevalence and risk factors according to different definitions in women attending urogynecology clinic