Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery Trial; Randomised Evaluation of Assessment Methods (UPSTREAM) for diagnosis and management of bladder outlet obstruction in men: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Lower urinary tract symptoms in men: the TRIUMPH cluster RCT

Background

Conservative therapies are recommended as initial treatment for male lower urinary tract symptoms. However, there is a lack of evidence on effectiveness and uncertainty regarding approaches to delivery.

Objective

The objective was to determine whether or not a standardised and manualised care intervention delivered in primary care achieves superior symptomatic outcome for lower urinary tract symptoms to usual care.

Design

This was a two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial.

Setting

The trial was set in 30 NHS general practice sites in England.

Participants

Participants were adult men (aged ≥ 18 years) with bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms.

Interventions

Sites were randomised 1 : 1 to deliver the TReatIng Urinary symptoms in Men in Primary Health care using non-pharmacological and non-surgical interventions trial intervention or usual care to all participants. The TReatIng Urinary symptoms in Men in Primary Health care using non-pharmacological and non-surgical interventions intervention comprised a standardised advice booklet developed for the trial from the British Association of Urological Surgeons' patient information sheets, with patient and expert input. Patients were directed to relevant sections by general practice or research nurses/healthcare assistants following urinary symptom assessment, providing the manualised element. The healthcare professional provided follow-up contacts over 12 weeks to support adherence to the intervention.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was the validated patient-reported International Prostate Symptom Score 12 months post consent. Rather than the minimal clinically important difference of 3.0 points for overall International Prostate Symptom Score, the sample size aimed to detect a difference of 2.0 points, owing to the recognised clinical impact of individual symptoms.

Results

A total of 1077 men consented to the study: 524 in sites randomised to the intervention arm (n = 17) and 553 in sites randomised to the control arm (n = 13). A difference in mean International Prostate Symptom Score at 12 months was found (adjusted mean difference of -1.81 points, 95% confidence interval -2.66 to -0.95 points), with a lower score in the intervention arm, indicating less severe symptoms. Secondary outcomes of patient-reported urinary symptoms, quality of life specific to lower urinary tract symptoms and perception of lower urinary tract symptoms all showed evidence of a difference between the arms favouring the intervention. No difference was seen between the arms in the proportion of urology referrals or adverse events. In qualitative interviews, participants welcomed the intervention, describing positive effects on their symptoms, as well as on their understanding of conservative care and their attitude towards the experience of lower urinary tract symptoms. The interviews highlighted that structured, in-depth self-management is insufficiently embedded within general practitioner consultations. From an NHS perspective, mean costs and quality-adjusted life-years were similar between trial arms. The intervention arm had slightly lower mean costs (adjusted mean difference of -£29.99, 95% confidence interval -£109.84 to £22.63) than the usual-care arm, and a small gain in quality-adjusted life-years (adjusted mean difference of 0.001, 95% confidence interval -0.011 to 0.014).

Conclusions

The intervention showed a small, sustained benefit for men's lower urinary tract symptoms and quality of life across a range of outcome measures in a UK primary care setting. Qualitative data showed that men highly valued the intervention. Intervention costs were marginally lower than usual-care costs. Limitations of the study included that trial participants were unmasked, with limited diversity in ethnicity and deprivation level. Additional research is needed to assess the applicability of the intervention for a more ethnically diverse population..

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN11669964.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/90/03) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 13. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Predicting Prostate Surgery Outcomes from Standard Clinical Assessments of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms To Derive Prognostic Symptom and Flowmetry Criteria

BACKGROUND

Assessment of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) needs to identify predictors of symptom outcomes when interventional treatment is planned.

OBJECTIVE

To develop a novel prediction model for prostate surgery outcomes and validate it using a separate patient cohort and derive thresholds for key clinical parameters.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

From the UPSTREAM trial of 820 men seeking treatment for LUTS, analysis of bladder diary (BD), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), IPSS-quality of life, and uroflowmetry data was performed for 176 participants who underwent prostate surgery and provided complete data. For external validation, data from a retrospective database of surgery outcomes in a Japanese urology department (n = 227) were used.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Symptom improvement was defined as a reduction in total IPSS of ≥3 points. Multiple logistic regression, classification tree analysis, and random forest models were generated, including versions with and without BD data.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Multiple logistic regression without BD data identified age (p = 0.029), total IPSS (p = 0.0016), and maximum flow rate (Qmax; p = 0.066) as predictors of outcomes, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 77.1%. Classification tree analysis without BD data gave thresholds of IPSS <16 and Qmax ≥13 ml/s (AUC 75.0%). The random forest model, which included all clinical parameters except BD data, had an AUC of 94.7%. Internal validation using the bootstrap method showed reasonable AUCs (69.6-85.8%). Analyses using BD data marginally improved the model fits. External validation gave comparable AUCs for logistic regression, classification tree analysis, and random forest models (all without BD; 70.9%, 67.3%, and 68.5%, respectively). Limitations include the significant number of men with incomplete baseline data and limited assessments in the external validation cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcomes of prostate surgery can be predicted preoperatively using age, total IPSS, and uroflowmetry data, with prognostic thresholds of 16 for IPSS and 13 ml/s for Qmax.

PATIENT SUMMARY

This study identified key preoperative factors that can predict outcomes of prostate surgery for bothersome urinary symptoms, including which patients are at risk of a poor outcome.

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy: long-term, trifecta- and pentafecta-based analysis of functional outcomes

Background:

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) proved to be a sound and effective procedure for bladder outlet obstructive symptoms relief. Routinely, the transvesical (Freyer) or transcapsular (Millin) techniques are performed. A novel approach of near-infrared fluorescence imaging (NIFI)-guided urethra-sparing robot-assisted prostatectomy (Madigan) was recently introduced.

Objectives:

The aim of our study was to evaluate the long-term functional outcomes between the Millin, Freyer, and Madigan RASP.

Design:

This is a single-center, retrospective evaluation of a prospectively maintained Institutional Review Board–approved database.

Methods:

Data from patients who have undergone RASP in our center were prospectively collected. Demographics, prostate size, and preoperative flowmetry parameters were assessed. Questionnaires such as International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ), International prostatic symptoms score (IPSS) with its quality of life (QoL) score, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ), Overactive bladder questionnaire (OABQ) were administered to every patient preoperatively and during follow-up. We tested composite outcomes (trifecta) defined as a combination of postoperative Q-max >15 ml/s, IPSS score < 8, and absence of complications. We also tested a pentafecta which keeps in account the persistence of antegrade ejaculation (MSHQ > 0) and the erectile function maintenance (∆IEEF < 6).

Results:

Median follow-up was 36 months. Millin, Madigan, and Freyer procedures were performed in 37 (51%), 18 (25%), and 17 (24%) cases, respectively. Trifecta was achieved in 43 (60%) patients. Preoperative ICIQ, postoperative IPSS, postoperative OABQ, and QoL were significantly different between groups (all p < 0.02). Pentafecta was achieved by 14 (20%) patients. The pentafecta group showed a statistically significant advantage in terms of postoperative IPSS and MSHQ ( p < 0.01).

Conclusion:

RASP provides an effective and durable relief of obstructive symptoms at long-term follow-up, regardless of the technique, achieving the trifecta in the majority of the patients. The Madigan technique is significantly related to the pentafecta achievement.

A constrained mixture-micturition-growth (CMMG) model of the urinary bladder: Application to partial bladder outlet obstruction (BOO)

We present a constrained mixture-micturition-growth (CMMG) model for the bladder. It simulates bladder mechanics, voiding function (micturition) and tissue adaptations in response to altered biomechanical conditions. The CMMG model is calibrated with both in vivo and in vitro data from healthy male rat urinary bladders (cystometry, bioimaging of wall structure, mechanical testing) and applied to simulate the growth and remodeling (G&R) response to partial bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). The bladder wall is represented as a multi-layered, anisotropic, nonlinear constrained mixture. A short time scale micturition component of the CMMG model accounts for the active and passive mechanics of voiding. Over a second, longer time scale, G&R algorithms for the evolution of both cellular and extracellular constituents act to maintain/restore bladder (homeostatic) functionality. The CMMG model is applied to a spherical membrane model of the BOO bladder utilizing temporal data from an experimental male rodent model to parameterize and then verify the model. Consistent with the experimental studies of BOO, the model predicts: an initial loss of voiding capacity followed by hypertrophy of SMC to restore voiding function; bladder enlargement; collagen remodeling to maintain its role as a protective sheath; and increased voiding duration with lower average flow rate. This CMMG model enables a mechanistic approach for investigating the bladder's structure-function relationship and its adaption in pathological conditions. While the approach is illustrated with a conceptual spherical bladder model, it provides the basis for application of the CMMG model to anatomical geometries. Such a mechanistic approach has promise as an in silico tool for the rational development of new surgical and pharmacological treatments for bladder diseases such as BOO.

Effectiveness and safety of electroacupuncture and its cotreatment with electronic moxibustion in the treatment of patients with moderate benign prostatic hyperplasia using alpha blocker: An assessor-blinded, randomized, controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a disease that affects the quality of life by causing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men. Electroacupuncture (EA) and moxibustion therapy have been suggested as an adjunct therapy for improving LUTS in patients with BPH, but clinical studies evaluating the effectiveness of EA and its cotreatment with electronic moxibustion (EM) in patients who have been prescribed alpha blockers have yet to be reported. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of EA and EM.

METHODS

Twenty-eight patients diagnosed with BPH were randomized to treatment group (TG, n = 14) or control group (CG, n = 14). The TG continued to use the previously prescribed alpha blocker and received the cotreatment of EA and EM 3 times a week for 6 weeks. The CG continued to use the previously prescribed alpha blocker alone for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the mean change in the international prostate symptom score (IPSS) from baseline to week 6. The secondary outcomes were IPSS at week 3 and 12, clinical relevance, IPSS life satisfaction, EuroQol-Five dimensions, average urinary flow rate, maximum urinary flow rate, and prostate volume.

RESULTS

The IPSS decreased at all time points with a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (3W: P = .0313; 6W: P = .0010; 12W: P = .0304). Based on the minimal clinically important difference (MCID, 3 points), there were significant differences between the TG and the CG at week 3, 6, and 12 (3W: P = .0461; 6W: P = .0123; 12W: P = .0216). Significant group × week interaction effects were found for the IPSS score (P = .0018), as determined from analyses using repeated measures analysis of variance. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in IPSS life satisfaction, EuroQol-Five dimensions, average urinary flow rate, maximum urinary flow rate, and prostate volume.

CONCLUSION

EA and its cotreatment with EM might have a beneficial effect as an adjunct therapy in improving LUTS in patients with BPH. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm the effectiveness and safety of EA and its cotreatment with EM.

Prostate Surgery for Men with Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: Do We Need Urodynamics to Find the Right Candidates? Exploratory Findings from the UPSTREAM Trial

BACKGROUND

Identifying men whose lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) may benefit from surgery is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

To identify routine diagnostic and urodynamic measures associated with treatment decision-making, and outcome, in exploratory analyses of the UPSTREAM trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomised controlled trial was conducted including 820 men, considering surgery for LUTS, across 26 hospitals in England (ISCTRN56164274).

INTERVENTION

Men were randomised to a routine care (RC) diagnostic pathway (n = 393) or a pathway that included urodynamics (UDS) in addition to RC (n = 427).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Men underwent uroflowmetry and completed symptom questionnaires, at baseline and 18 mo after randomisation. Regression models identified baseline clinical and symptom measures that predicted recommendation for surgery and/or surgical outcome (measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS]). We explored the association between UDS and surgical outcome in subgroups defined by routine measures.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The recommendation for surgery could be predicted successfully in the RC and UDS groups (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.78), with maximum flow rate (Q_max) and age predictors in both groups. Surgery was more beneficial in those with higher symptom scores (eg, IPSS >16), age <74 yr, Q_max <9.8 ml/s, bladder outlet obstruction index >47.6, and bladder contractility index >123.0. In the UDS group, urodynamic measures were more strongly predictive of surgical outcome for those with Q_max >15, although patient-reported outcomes were also more predictive in this subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment decisions were informed with UDS, when available, but without evidence of change in the decisions reached. Despite the small group sizes, exploratory analyses suggest that selective use of UDS could detect obstructive pathology, missed by routine measures, in certain subgroups.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Baseline clinical and symptom measurements were able to predict treatment decisions. The addition of urodynamic test results, while useful, did not generally lead to better surgical decisions and outcomes over routine tests alone.

Qualitative Assessment of the Conservative Management of Nocturia with Standardised Written Materials for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Men Treated in Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Many men prefer conservative treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) but education and self-help guidance are limited in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

To report qualitative interview findings for men reporting nocturia in a primary care setting for LUTS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

TRIUMPH (Treating Urinary Symptoms in Men in Primary Healthcare) is a multicentre cluster randomised trial of standardised manualised care (a booklet delivered by a health care professional) versus usual care for LUTS. The participants (524 in the intervention arm and 553 in the usual care arm) were men presenting for primary care for LUTS at 30 general practice (GP) sites in the UK.

INTERVENTION

Delivery of a LUTS self-management booklet by health care staff in comparison to usual care for men with LUTS.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The qualitative component included 58 early-stage (0-3 mo after study enrolment) and 33 late-stage (3-9 mo later) interviews with participants to assess their experience of LUTS and conservative treatment in primary care. Purposive sampling was used to select participants for interview.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Nocturia is a common driver for seeking health care and is perceived by men as relatively acceptable to discuss. Information and self-help guidance were largely absent from descriptions of GP consultations, other than reducing evening caffeine and fluid intake. The TRIUMPH LUTS intervention booklet offers explanations and self-management guidance. Men with long-term disruptive symptoms, a perception that the booklet content was novel or worthwhile, and a belief that self-management might help, were more receptive to the intervention. In follow-up, improvements in nocturia were related to successful implementation of several aspects of the guidance. Most men were willing to complete a bladder diary, but some found it inconvenient, especially men in employment. The characteristics of the trial population mean that the findings may not apply to all men.

CONCLUSIONS

Reassuring men that nocturia is part of ageing without offering them information and support risks reinforcing the tendency to discount problematic LUTS. The trial booklet and the training of health care professionals support guidance on nocturia self-management, which is most effective for men receptive to this approach. However, the nature of the trial population means that the findings may not apply to all men.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Men are more comfortable in discussing waking at night to urinate than talking about other urinary symptoms with their GP. This problem should lead to a detailed discussion of all urinary symptoms rather than being thought of as a sign of ageing. An information booklet and nurse consultation helped many men to improve this symptom.

Use of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaires Bladder Diary in Men Seeking therapy for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

BACKGROUND

Completion rates and correspondence to other measures need to be established for the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) bladder diary (ICIQ-BD) in the assessment of male lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate ICIQ-BD completion rates, frequency, volume, and sensation reporting for men.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Baseline data from the Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery Trial; Randomised Evaluation of Assessment Methods (UPSTREAM) randomised controlled trial evaluating 820 men at 26 UK hospitals, looking at the ICIQ-BD, uroflowmetry, International Prostate Symptom Score, and ICIQ symptom score for male LUTS (ICIQ-MLUTS), were assessed.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The ICIQ-BD, IPSS, ICIQ-MLUTS, and uroflowmetry data at baseline obtained from UPSTREAM were assessed. Correlations were analysed by Pearson's correlation coefficient, and comparison between groups were performed using paired or unpaired t tests or Tukey's test. All statistical tests were two sided and the strength of evidence was presented using p values.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Of the participants, 25.0% (205/820) provided complete voiding and bedtime information for 3 d, 41.2% (338/820) omitted bedtime information, and the remainder omitted some or all voiding information. Median values (minimum - maximum) of 24-h, daytime, and night-time frequencies were 9.7 (3.3-24.0), 7.7 (3.3-22.7), and 1.7 (0.0-5.7), respectively. The mean voided volume per micturition for day and night times were 175.8 ± 74.2 and 264.4 ± 150.7 ml (p < 0.001), respectively. For fully completed diaries, day- and night-time frequency showed a weak-to-moderate correlation with symptom score questionnaires. More severe nocturia was generally reported in symptom scores than in the ICIQ-BD. In patients with high bother for increased daytime frequency (symptom), the mean daytime frequency (ICIQ-BD) was 9.6 ± 3.2 versus 7.6 ± 2.2 for low bother (p < 0.001). High bother for nocturia showed night-time frequency of 2.3 ± 1.2 versus 1.5 ± 1.1 for low bother (p < 0.001). For fully and partially completed diaries, ICIQ-BD sensation scores correlated weakly with symptom scores. Voided volumes from the bladder diary and uroflowmetry correlated weakly.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-thirds of men (543/820) fully completed voiding information in the ICIQ-BD, but many omitted bedtime information, limiting the ability to quantify nocturia and diagnose nocturnal polyuria.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Most men with urinary symptoms complete a bladder diary fully but may fail to indicate bedtimes. Extra information from a diary helps support symptom questionnaires to explain a patient's urinary habits.

Urodynamics tests for the diagnosis and management of bladder outlet obstruction in men: the UPSTREAM non-inferiority RCT

BACKGROUND

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men may indicate bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) or weakness, known as detrusor underactivity (DU). Severe bothersome LUTS are a common indication for surgery. The diagnostic tests may include urodynamics (UDS) to confirm whether BOO or DU is the cause, potentially reducing the number of people receiving (inappropriate) surgery.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine whether a care pathway including UDS is no worse for symptom outcome than one in which it is omitted, at 18 months after randomisation. Rates of surgery was the key secondary outcome.

DESIGN

This was a pragmatic, multicentre, two-arm (unblinded) randomised controlled trial, incorporating a health economic analysis and qualitative research.

SETTING

Urology departments of 26 NHS hospitals in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Men (aged ≥ 18 years) seeking further treatment, potentially including surgery, for bothersome LUTS. Exclusion criteria were as follows: unable to pass urine without a catheter, having a relevant neurological disease, currently undergoing treatment for prostate or bladder cancer, previously had prostate surgery, not medically fit for surgery and/or unwilling to be randomised.

INTERVENTIONS

Men were randomised to a care pathway based on non-invasive routine tests (control) or routine care plus invasive UDS (intervention arm).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 18 months after randomisation and the key secondary outcome was rates of surgery. Additional secondary outcomes included adverse events (AEs), quality of life, urinary and sexual symptoms, UDS satisfaction, maximum urinary flow rate and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

A total of 820 men were randomised (UDS, 427; routine care, 393). Sixty-seven men withdrew before 18 months and 11 died (unrelated to trial procedures). UDS was non-inferior to routine care for IPSS 18 months after randomisation, with a confidence interval (CI) within the margin of 1 point (-0.33, 95% CI -1.47 to 0.80). A lower surgery rate in the UDS arm was not found (38% and 36% for UDS and routine care, respectively), with overall rates lower than expected. AEs were similar between the arms at 43-44%. There were more cases of acute urinary retention in the routine care arm. Patient-reported outcomes for LUTS improved in both arms and satisfaction with UDS was high in men who received it. UDS was more expensive than routine care. From a secondary care perspective, UDS cost an additional £216 over an 18-month time horizon. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were similar, with a QALY difference of 0.006 in favour of UDS over 18 months. It was established that UDS was acceptable to patients, and valued by both patients and clinicians for its perceived additional insight into the cause and probable best treatment of LUTS.

LIMITATIONS

The trial met its predefined recruitment target, but surgery rates were lower than anticipated.

CONCLUSIONS

Inclusion of UDS in the diagnostic tests results in a symptom outcome that is non-inferior to a routine care pathway, but does not affect surgical rates for treating BOO. Results do not support the routine use of UDS in men undergoing investigation of LUTS.

FUTURE WORK

Focus should be placed on indications for selective utilisation of UDS in individual cases and long-term outcomes of diagnosis and therapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN56164274.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 42. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaires (ICIQ): An update on status and direction

AIMS

In its 22nd year, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ) project continues to promote its primary objective; the development and dissemination of patient completed questionnaires for the standardized, high-quality assessment of urinary, bowel, and vaginal symptoms. The paper gives an update on the ICIQ in the context of current scientific developments of PROM design and regulatory requirements, and plans are outlined for its future direction.

METHODS

An online library of all questionnaires, including over 300 translations has been launched to facilitate access through a semi-automated registration system. The ICIQ project continues to update its protocol to meet current scientific standards and incorporate methodological advances within PROM development.

RESULTS

Nineteen psychometrically validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are published for use in clinical practice and research, including amongst others, a bladder diary, male and female lower urinary tract symptoms, long term catheter, pad use, and bowel symptom questionnaires. The original ICIQ-UI Short Form for the assessment of urinary incontinence continues to be the most internationally used questionnaire and has been translated into over 60 languages. New questionnaires which are under development include the ICIQ-Underactive Bladder and ICIQ-Satisfaction. We anticipate the new website and online library will further facilitate the ease of dissemination and availability of the questionnaires for clinical practice and research.

CONCLUSION

The ICIQ continues to successfully achieve its primary objective. Going forward, a greater focus on promoting routine clinical use and the potential for electronic integration into databases and medical records is envisaged.

Urology highlights 2017 to 2018

The final clinical session of the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) annual meeting is the Updates and Highlights session, where the most important advances in the main urological sub-specialities are summarised and presented by sub-specialist experts representing each BAUS section. The aim of the session is to disseminate knowledge on the latest research, new guidelines and changes to general and specialist clinical practice. This paper covers contemporary urological advances as presented at the Liverpool BAUS meeting in June 2018.

Quality control of uroflowmetry and urodynamic data from two large multicenter studies of male lower urinary tract symptoms

AIM

The International Continence Society (ICS) has standardized quality control and interpretation of uroflowmetry and urodynamics. We evaluated traces from two large studies of male lower urinary tract symptoms (UPSTREAM and UNBLOCS) against ICS standards of urodynamic equipment and practice.

METHODS

Ten percent of uroflowmetry and urodynamics traces were selected at random from hospital sites. A data capture template was designed from the ICS Fundamentals of Urodynamic Practice checklist. Two pretrained blinded assessors extracted the data, with a third assessor to arbitrate. Departmental records of calibration checks and equipment maintenance were scrutinized.

RESULTS

Seven out of twenty-five (28%) departments reported no calibration checks. Four sites (16%) could not provide annual service records. In 32 out of 296 (10.8%) uroflowmetry traces, findings were affected by artifact. One hundred ten urodynamic study traces were reviewed; in 11 records (10%), key pressure traces were incompletely displayed. In 30 (27.2%), reference zero was not set to atmospheric pressure. Resting pressures were outside the expected range for 36 (32.7%). Pressure drift was seen in 18 traces (16.4%). At pressure-flow study commencement, permission to void was omitted in 15 (13.6%). Cough testing after voiding was done in 71.2%, but the resulting cough spikes were significantly different in 16.5%. Erroneous diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) was identified in six cases (5.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Erroneous diagnosis of BOO is a serious error of interpretation, as it could lead to unnecessary surgery. Other errors of standardization, testing, and interpretation were identified with lower risk of adverse implications. Inconsistent documentation of service records mean equipment accuracy is uncertain.

Moxibustion as an adjunct for lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostate enlargement: A randomized controlled pilot trial

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) causes discomfort in daily life, including lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTSs) caused by the enlarged prostate, and requires long-term management as a chronic, irreversible disease. To improve LUTS, certain complementary therapies have been used with or without doctors' directions. Conventional treatments and complementary therapies tend to be combined unsystematically, depending on patient preference; thus, research for safe and efficient combination therapy is warranted.

METHODS

Twenty-nine participants were randomly assigned to an integrative group (IG, n = 15) or a conventional group (CG, n = 14). The IG received moxibustion (twice weekly for 4 weeks, at the acupuncture points SP6, LR3, and CV4) and conventional medication for 4 weeks, followed by conventional medication alone for 8 weeks. The CG received conventional medication alone for 12 weeks. The outcome measures were International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), patient's global impression of changes (PGIC), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), postvoid residual urine volume (PVR), and frequency-volume chart.

RESULTS

Total IPSS (IG, -2.4 ± 4.2; CG, 0.9 ± 4.0; P = .039), PGIC-A (IG, 3.5 ± 1.0; CG, 2.2 ± 1.0; P = .001), and PGIC-B (IG, 3.5 ± 0.1; CG, 4.7 ± 0.6; P = .004) were significantly improved in the IG compared with the CG, 4 weeks after baseline. Among the IPSS items, incomplete emptying (IG, -0.6 ± 0.7; CG, 0.4 ± 1.2; P = .019), straining (IG, -0.6 ± 0.8; CG, 0.2 ± 1.2; P = .046), and nocturia (IG, -0.8 ± 1.4; CG, 0.1 ± 1.0; P = .045) showed significant differences. The Qmax and PVR volume did not differ significantly at 12 weeks after the baseline.

CONCLUSION

Moxibustion can be considered an adjunct therapy to improve LUTS in BPE patients. A full-sized randomized controlled trial would be feasible with comparator modifications and an extended study period. The study design should include a placebo group and narrow the eligibility to subjects who do not respond well to conventional treatments.

Is the value of urodynamics undermined by poor technique?: ICI-RS 2018

INTRODUCTION

The quality of urodynamic measurements in clinical practice has been debated as a matter of concern. It is considered plausible that this has a direct bearing on patient care and the perceived value of urodynamic testing.

METHODS

This is a report of the proceedings of the Think Tank: "Is the value of urodynamics undermined by poor technique?" from the Annual International Consultation on Incontinence-Research Society, which took place in June 2018 in Bristol, UK. The Think Tank discussed the evidence for deficiencies in urodynamic test quality and considered the implications of improvements for clinical diagnosis and practice.

RESULTS

There is evidence that technique affects urodynamic quality, and that urodynamic practice is variable. Factors such as team skill set, technologies used, and training received will also affect the quality of urodynamic service. Questions exist regarding the influence of technique on the utility and perceived value of urodynamics.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest research questions that will provide the necessary evidence on the link between technique, reporting, and outcome, and clarify the role of good practice in the utility of urodynamic testing.

TReatIng Urinary symptoms in Men in Primary Healthcare using non-pharmacological and non-surgical interventions (TRIUMPH) compared with usual care: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) can relate to urinary storage or voiding. In men, the prevalence and severity of LUTS increases with age, with a significant impact on quality of life. The majority of men presenting with LUTS are managed by their general practitioner (GP) in the first instance, with conservative therapies recommended as the initial treatment. However, the provision of conservative therapies in primary care is variable and can be time and resource limited. GPs require practical resources to enhance patient engagement with such interventions. TRIUMPH aims to determine whether a standardised and manualised care intervention delivered in primary care achieves superior symptomatic outcome for LUTS versus usual care.

METHODS/DESIGN

TRIUMPH is a two-arm, cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) being conducted in 30 National Health Service (NHS) general practices in England. The TRIUMPH intervention comprises a standardised LUTS advice booklet developed for the trial with patient and healthcare professional (HCP) consultation. The booklet is delivered to patients by nurses/healthcare assistants following assessment of their urinary symptoms. Patients are directed to relevant sections of the booklet, providing the manualised element of the intervention. To encourage adherence, HCPs provide follow-up contacts over 12 weeks. Practices are randomised 1:1 to either deliver the TRIUMPH intervention or a usual care pathway. The patient-reported International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) at 12 months post consent is the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes include cost-effectiveness, patient-reported outcomes on LUTS, quality of life, and patient and HCP acceptability and experience of the intervention. Primary analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis.

DISCUSSION

It is unclear whether conservative therapies for male LUTS are effectively delivered in primary care using current approaches. This can lead to men being inappropriately referred to secondary care or experiencing persistent symptoms. Primary care, therefore, holds the key to effective treatment for these men. The TRIUMPH intervention, through its standardised and manualised approach, has been developed to support GP practices in delivering effective conservative care. This pragmatic, cluster RCT should provide robust evidence in a primary-care setting to inform future guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISCRTN registry, ID: ISRCTN11669964 . Registered on 12 April 2018.

New Diagnostics for Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) is a common constellation of symptoms that affect the aging male population with an astonishing prevalence. New technology and new uses of established technology are being used to help further evaluate LUTS in the male population and help guide treatment options. This review focuses on the developments and future directions in diagnostic modalities for evaluation of male LUTS, focusing on evaluation of both the filling and voiding phases of micturition.

RECENT FINDINGS

New techniques in evaluating the voiding phase include penile cuff test, external pressure sensing condom catheter, ultrasound measurement of detrusor wall thickness, ultrasound measurement of intravesical prostatic protrusion, doppler ultrasound and NIRS technology. Evaluation of the filling phase is still undergoing much development and requires additional validation studies. The techniques undergoing evaluation include sensation meters during UDS, assessing bladder micromotion and wall rhythm, assessing detrusor wall biomechanics, ultrasound measurement of detrusor wall thickness, pelvic doppler ultrasound, as well as functional brain imaging including fNIRS and fMRI.

SUMMARY

The development of novel, non-invasive, diagnostic tools have the potential for better evaluation of LUTS with earlier and enhanced treatments. This will likely improve the quality of life for men with LUTS.

Clinical and Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Men Referred for Consideration of Surgery to Treat Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms: Baseline Results and Diagnostic Findings of the Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery Trial; Randomised Evaluation of Assessment Methods (UPSTREAM)

BACKGROUND

Clinical evaluation of male lower urinary tract symptoms (MLUTS) in secondary care uses a range of assessments. It is unknown how MLUTS evaluation influences outcome of therapy recommendations and choice, notably urodynamics (UDS; filling cystometry and pressure flow studies).

OBJECTIVE

To report participants' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and initial diagnostic findings of the Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery Trial; Randomised Evaluation of Assessment Methods (UPSTREAM). UPSTREAM is a randomised controlled trial evaluating whether symptoms are noninferior and surgery rates are lower if UDS is included.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of 820 men (≥18 yr of age) seeking treatment for bothersome LUTS were recruited from 26 National Health Service hospital urology departments.

INTERVENTION

Care pathway based on routine, noninvasive tests (control) or routine care plus UDS (intervention arm).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome is International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and the key secondary outcome is surgery rates 18 mo after randomisation. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaires were captured for MLUTS, sexual function, and UDS satisfaction. Baseline clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and UDS findings were informally compared between arms. Trends across age groups for urinary and sexual PROMs were evaluated with a Cuzick's test, and questionnaire items were compared using Pearson's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Storage LUTS, notably nocturia, and impaired sexual function are prominent in men being assessed for surgery. Sociodemographic and clinical evaluations were similar between arms. Overall mean IPSS and quality of life scores were 18.94 and 4.13, respectively. Trends were found across age groups, with older men suffering from higher rates of incontinence, nocturia, and erectile dysfunction, and younger men suffering from increased daytime frequency and voiding symptoms. Men undergoing UDS testing expressed high satisfaction with the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Men being considered for surgery have additional clinical features that may affect treatment decision making and outcomes, notably storage LUTS and impaired sexual function.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We describe initial assessment findings from a large clinical study of the treatment pathway for men suffering with bothersome urinary symptoms who were referred to hospital for further treatment, potentially including surgery. We report the patient characteristics and diagnostic test results, including symptom questionnaires, bladder diaries, flow rate tests, and urodynamics.

Where can urodynamic testing help assess male lower urinary tract symptoms?

Urodynamic studies assess the function of the bladder and bladder outlet. They are often useful in the assessment and diagnosis of patients presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). The evidence regarding the value and risks of invasive urodynamics remains insufficient. However, men with LUTS who are assessed by invasive urodynamics are more likely to have their management changed and less likely to undergo surgery. This review discusses the role of urodynamic diagnosis and application in the diagnosis and treatment of male LUTS.

Recommendations for conducting invasive urodynamics for men with lower urinary tract symptoms: Qualitative interview findings from a large randomized controlled trial (UPSTREAM)

Aims

To capture in‐depth qualitative evidence regarding attitudes to and experiences of urodynamic testing among men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) at each end of the clinical pathway.

Methods

Semi‐structured interview study conducted within the Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery: Randomized Evaluation of Assessment Methods (UPSTREAM) trial, which randomized men to a care pathway including urodynamics or routine non‐invasive tests from 26 secondary care urology sites across England. Men were interviewed after assessments but prior to treatment, or after surgery for LUTS. Men were purposively sampled to include those who had urodynamics and those who did not, and diversity in demographic characteristics and symptom burden. Interviews were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis.

Results

Forty‐one men participated (25 pre‐treatment, 16 post‐surgery), ages 52‐89. The 16 men who had not previously experienced urodynamics said they would accept the test in their assessment, but some were apprehensive or wanted more information. The 25 men who had experienced urodynamics all found it acceptable, though some reported pain, infection, or embarrassment. Embarrassment was minimized by informing patients what the procedure would be like, and ensuring privacy. Urodynamics was valued for its perceived diagnostic insight. Information deficits were reported before, during, and after the test. How and when results were explained and the adequacy of explanations varied.

Conclusions

Urodynamics is acceptable to men with LUTS and generally well‐tolerated. To ensure patients are prepared and informed, good communication before and during the procedure is essential. Privacy should be prioritized, and test results discussed promptly and in sufficient detail. Staff require training and guidance in these areas.

Urodynamics Useless in Female Stress Urinary Incontinence? Time for Some Sense-A European Expert Consensus

BACKGROUND

Routine use of urodynamics (UDS) for the assessment of female stress urinary incontinence (SUI) appears to be in decline across Europe. The reasons for this trend appear multifactorial, but the implications are of significant concern.

OBJECTIVES

To achieve an expert consensus viewpoint on the value of UDS in female SUI and current barriers to its use.

METHODOLOGY

A multidisciplinary group of UDS experts from six European countries was convened, and a modified version of the Delphi method was utilised to reach a consensus viewpoint structured around five key questions.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved on all five questions. The group was unanimous that the decline in routine use of UDS is unjustified and misguided, driven by restrictions in funding and accelerated by the publication-and subsequent influence-of two trials that had major limitations.

LIMITATIONS

The authors comprised a selected group of UDS experts and the analysis is not a formal systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

Extensive experience and observational studies have demonstrated the value of UDS for the assessment of female SUI and the dangers of empiric management. This evidence base should not be eclipsed by the findings of two randomised controlled trials that had numerous shortcomings.

PATIENT SUMMARY

A group of experts were worried that, even though the cause of incontinence varies, doctors seem to be skipping a diagnostic test called urodynamics (UDS) in some patients and just providing treatment-even surgery-without knowing exactly what is wrong. These experts analysed the situation in detail and reached agreement that UDS testing should not be skipped.

Is Urodynamics Necessary when Assessing a Patient with Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms?

Urodynamics can distinguish bladder outlet obstruction from detrusor underactivity. Clear identification of the mechanism of a man's voiding symptoms can help give the best chance of good outcome from surgery. Publication of results from the UPSTREAM study will help in establishing the exact place for urodynamic testing in male lower urinary tract symptoms.

Early Surgical Intervention May Be More Likely to Cause Complications in Patients with Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms than To Prevent Them

There is no evidence that early surgical intervention will prevent complications due to bladder outlet obstruction, and a high likelihood that the surgery will bring its own complications.

Statistical analysis plan for the Urodynamics for Prostate Surgery Trial; Randomised Evaluation of Assessment Methods (UPSTREAM)

BACKGROUND

Current management for men with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) is a pathway that results in prostate surgery in a significant proportion. While helpful in relieving benign prostatic obstruction (BPO), surgery may be ineffective for men suffering from difficulties not relating to BPO. The UPSTREAM trial started recruitment in October 2014 with the aim of establishing whether a care pathway including urodynamics (a diagnostic tool for BPO and thus an indication of whether surgery is needed) is no worse for men, in terms of symptomatic outcome, than one without (routine care).

METHODS/DESIGN

This analysis plan outlines the main outcomes of the study and specific design choices, such as non-inferiority margins. The trial is currently recruiting in 26 hospitals across the UK, randomising men to either urodynamics or routine care, with recruitment set to end on the 31 December 2016. All outcomes will be measured 18 months after randomisation to allow sufficient time for surgical procedures and recovery. The primary outcome is based on a non-inferiority design with a margin of 1 point on the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) scale. The key secondary outcome for this trial is surgery rate per arm, which is estimated to be at least 18% lower in the urodynamics arm. Surgery rates, adverse events, flow rate, urinary symptoms and sexual symptoms are secondary outcomes to be assessed for superiority. This is an update to the UPSTREAM protocol, which has already been published in this journal.

DISCUSSION

This a priori statistical analysis plan aims to reduce reporting bias by allowing access to the trial's objectives and plans in advance of recruitment end. The results of the trial are expected to be published soon after the trial end date of 30 September 2018.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN56164274 . Registered on 8 April 2014.

Male bladder outlet obstruction: Time to re-evaluate the definition and reconsider our diagnostic pathway? ICI-RS 2015

The diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in the male is dependent on measurements of pressure and flow made during urodynamic studies. The procedure of urodynamics and the indices used to delineate BOO are well standardized largely as a result of the work of the International Continence Society. The clinical utility of the diagnosis of BOO is however, less well defined and there are several shortcomings and gaps in the currently available medical literature. Consequently the International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society (ICI-RS) held a think tank session in 2015 entitled "Male bladder outlet obstruction: Time to re-evaluate the definition and reconsider our diagnostic pathway?" This manuscript details the discussions that took place within that think tank setting out the pros and cons of the current definition of BOO and exploring alternative clinical tests (alone or in combination) which may be useful in the future investigation of male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. The think tank panel concluded that pressure-flow studies remain the diagnostic gold-standard for BOO although there is still a lack of high quality evidence. Newer, less invasive, investigations have shown promise in terms of diagnostic accuracy for BOO but similar criticisms can be levelled against these tests. Therefore, the think tank suggests further research with regard to these alternative indicators to determine their clinical utility.

Advances in urology 2015–2016

It has become customary that a session is held at the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) annual meeting wherein the most important advances in the major urological sub-specialities are summarised by British opinion leaders for the benefit of the core urologist. It gives us pleasure to present in this paper (to which the six authors contributed equally) the topics covered at the Liverpool BAUS meeting in June 2016.

Urodynamic Testing for Men with Voiding Symptoms Considering Interventional Therapy: The Merits of a Properly Constructed Randomised Trial

Insufficient evidence exists regarding the role of invasive urodynamics in routine practice in the clinical assessment of male lower urinary tract symptoms. UPSTREAM, a multicentre randomised trial, will inform patients, clinicians, and policy-makers about whether urodynamics should be more widely used for such patients.