Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Use of Uroflowmetry as a Diagnostic Test

  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Uroflowmetry is widely used for initial non-invasive evaluation of lower urinary tract disorders. Current clinical use is mostly restricted to a scrutiny of the maximum flow rate and uroflow pattern recorded by a conventional flowmeter in a health care facility. There are several advancements in our understanding and in available technologies that promise to transform clinical utilization of this simple test.

Recent Findings

Several aspects of the uroflow test in addition to maximum flow rate and uroflow pattern show potential diagnostic utility. This includes flow acceleration, uroflow indices, uroflow-electromyography including lag time, stop uroflow test, and uroflow-based nomograms. There are initial attempts to use artificial intelligence in analysis. There is also new data with regard to factors influencing variability of uroflow testing that might influence the diagnostic value in as yet uncertain ways including diurnal variability, postural variability, locational variability, and operator variability. There are new technologies for uroflow testing in a home environment allowing for easy repetition. However, there are several challenges owing to a paucity of clinical data and standardization. There are also critical lacunae in terminology that need to be addressed.

Summary

There are exciting new advancements in the field of uroflowmetry. However, there is need to standardize and validate the newer uroflow tracing analyses and technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. de Wachter S, Abranches-Monteiro L, Gammie A, Hashim H, Nitti V, Rosier P, Sinha S, Tarcan T, Toozs-Hobson P, Wen JG. Urodynamic testing. In: Cardozo L, Rovner E, Wagg A, Wein A, Abrams P, editors. Incontinence. 7th ed. Bristol, UK: ICUD ICS; 2023. p. 487–550.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Lerner LB, McVary KT, Barry MJ, Bixler BR, Dahm P, Das AK, et al. Management of lower urinary tract symptoms attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia: AUA Guideline Part I-Initial work-up and medical management. J Urol. 2021;206(4):806–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Harding CK, Lapitan MC, Arlandis S, Bo K, Costantini E, Groen J, Nambiar AK, Omar MI, Phe V. Non-neurogenic female LUTS. European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2023 [cited 2023 Jan 5]. Available from https://uroweb.org/guideline/non-neurogenic-female-luts.

  4. Cornu JN, Gacci M, Hashim H, Herrmann TRW, Malde S, Netsch C, Rieken M, Sakalis V, Tutolo M. Non-neurogenic male LUTS. European Association of Urology Guidelines. 2023 [cited 2023 Jun 12]. Available from https://uroweb.org/guideline/treatment-of-non-neurogenic-male-luts/.

  5. Schäfer W, Abrams P, Liao L, Mattiasson A, Pesce F, Spangberg A, et al. Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(3):261–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. •• Young GJ, Metcalfe C, Lane JA, Lewis AL, Abrams P, Blair PS, et al. Prostate surgery for men with lower urinary tract symptoms: Do we need urodynamics to find the right candidates? Exploratory findings from the UPSTREAM trial. Eur Urol Focus. 2022;8(5):1331–9. Secondary analysis of a large randomized trial comparing the outcome of prostate surgery in men offered routine care versus urodynamics-based evaluation. This analysis showed that regardless of evaluation pathway, uroflow was an important predictor of outcome.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Batavia JP, Combs AJ. Non-invasive testing and its role in diagnosis and management of children with voiding dysfunction. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep. 2018;13(2):56–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. • Ben Muvhar R, Wagmaister J, Mekayten M. Navigating the diagnostic maze: unraveling the non-invasive evaluation of bladder outlet obstruction in men—A comprehensive systematic review. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep. 2023;18(4):318–32. Systematic review of all non-invasive evaluation for assessing bladder outlet obstruction in men including uroflowmetry with comments on flow rate, flow pattern and volume correction.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ito H, Sakamaki K, Young GJ, Blair PS, Hashim H, Lane JA, et al. Predicting prostate surgery outcomes from standard clinical assessments of lower urinary tract symptoms to derive prognostic symptom and flowmetry criteria. Eur Urol Focus. 2023;S2405–4569(23):00154–62.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Escobar C, Brucker B. Urodynamics for the “failed” midurethral sling. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep. 2020;15(4):245–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sinha S, Agarwal MM, Vasudeva P, Khattar N, Madduri VKS, Yande S, et al. The urological Society of India Guidelines for the evaluation and management of nonneurogenic urinary incontinence in adults (executive summary). Indian J Urol. 2019;35(3):185–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. •• Tarcan T, Acar O, Agarwal MM, Rubilotta E, De Nunzio C, Rosier P. ICS educational module: The practice of uroflowmetry in adults. Continence. 2024;9:101065. An educational module from the International Continence Society on uroflowmetry with comments on technique, quality check, interpretation, and reporting based on a systematic review and expert consensus.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bauer SB, Nijman RJM, Drzewiecki BA, Sillen U, Hoebeke P, International Children’s Continence Society Standardization Subcommittee. International Children’s Continence Society standardization report on urodynamic studies of the lower urinary tract in children. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(7):640–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. ICS Glossary [Internet]. ICS. [cited 2022 Sep 26]. Available from https://www.ics.org/glossary.

  15. Wada N, Watanabe M, Ishikawa M, Takeuchi K, Miyauchi K, Abe N, et al. Uroflowmetry pattern in detrusor underactivity and bladder outlet obstruction in male patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2021;13(3):361–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Netto JMB, Hittelman A, Lambert S, Murphy K, Collette-Gardere T, Franco I. Interpretation of uroflow curves: A global survey measuring inter and intra rater reliability. Neurourol Urodyn. 2020;39(2):826–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Martonosi ÁR, Pázmány P, Kiss S, Földi M, Zsákai A, Szabó L. Urine flow acceleration in healthy children: A retrospective cohort study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2023;42(2):463–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Karasu AFG, Aydın S, Kalkan S, Ersoz C. Association of intrinsic sphincter deficiency with urine flow acceleration measurement. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2021;13(1):154–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Futyma K, Nowakowski Ł, Bogusiewicz M, Ziętek A, Wieczorek AP, Rechberger T. Use of uroflow parameters in diagnosing an overactive bladder-back to the drawing board. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(1):198–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Franco I, Franco J, Lee YS, Choi EK, Han SW. Can a quantitative means be used to predict flow patterns: Agreement between visual inspection vs flow index derived flow patterns. J Pediatr Urol. 2016;12(4):218.e1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Ha JS, Lee YS, Han SW, Kim SW. The relationship among flow index, uroflowmetry curve shape, and EMG lag time in children. Neurourol Urodyn. 2020;39(5):1387–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. • Van Batavia JP, Pohl HG, Farhat WA, Chiang G, BaniHani A, Collett-Gardere T, et al. Is it time to reconsider how we document pediatric uroflow studies?: A study from the SPU Voiding Dysfunction task force. J Pediatr Urol. 2023;19(5):546–54. Study from the Society of Pediatric Urology Voiding Dysfunction task force showing the limitations of using flow pattern.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sinha S. Dysfunctional voiding: a review of the terminology, presentation, evaluation and management in children and adults. Indian J Urol. 2011;27(4):437–47.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Sharifi-Rad L, Ladi-Seyedian S-S, Amirzargar H, Kajbafzadeh A-M. Pelvic floor electromyography and urine flow patterns in children with vesicoureteral reflux and lower urinary tract symptoms. Int Braz J Urol. 2018;44(6):1207–14.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Rosier PFWM, Gammie A, Valdevenito JP, Speich J, Smith P, Sinha S, et al. ICS-SUFU standard: Theory, terms, and recommendations for pressure-flow studies performance, analysis, and reporting. Part 2: Analysis of PFS, reporting, and diagnosis. Neurourol Urodyn. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.25187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. El-Hakim A, Al-Hathal N, Al-Qaoud T, Gagné G, Larocque S, Denis R, et al. Novel uroflow stop test at time of catheter removal is a strong predictor of early urinary continence recovery following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A pilot study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2015;34(1):60–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Alenizi AM, Bienz M, Rajih E, Alesawi A, Al-Hathal N, Benayoun S, et al. Uroflow stop test and potency recovery: A surrogate for pelvic floor integrity post robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy? Urology. 2015;86(4):766–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Boni A, Gervasoni F, Lomauro A, Del Zingaro M, Maiolino G, Galletti C, et al. Urologic latency time during uroflow stop test with electromyography: An incontinence detector in rehabilitation after robotic radical prostatectomy. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2023;59(1):94–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Shinohara M, Torimoto K, Matsushita C, Gotoh D, Yoshida H, Saka T, et al. A new nomogram of urinary flow rate and volume based on multiple measurements per healthy adult Japanese men using a portable uroflowmeter (P-Flowdiary®). BMC Urol. 2022;22(1):130.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Szmydki D, Burzynski B, Soltysiak-Gibala Z, Przymuszala P, Trzewik M, Chudek J, et al. Prediction of detrusor underactivity based on non-invasive functional tests and clinical data in patients with symptoms of bladder outlet obstruction. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2020;24(21):10992–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Matsukawa Y, Kameya Y, Takahashi T, Shimazu A, Ishida S, Yamada M, et al. Characteristics of uroflowmetry patterns in men with detrusor underactivity revealed by artificial intelligence. Int J Urol. 2023;30(10):907–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Spyropoulos E, Galanakis I, Deligiannis D, Spyropoulou A, Kotsiris D, Panagopoulos A, et al. Flow resistive forces index (QRF): Development and clinical applicability assessment of a novel measure of bladder outlet resistance, aiming to enhance the diagnostic performance of uroflowmetry. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2020;12(3):190–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yoshiyama A, Tsujimura A, Hiramatsu I, Morino J, Anno Y, Kurosawa M, et al. Circadian rhythm of voided volume, maximum flow rate, and voiding time evaluated by toilet uroflowmetry in hospitalized women with nocturia. Urology. 2023;179:50–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hiramatsu I, Tsujimura A, Miyoshi M, Ogasa T, Miyoshi Y, Ishikawa K, et al. Maximum flow rate is lowest in the early morning in hospitalized men with nocturia evaluated over 24 hours by toilet uroflowmetry. Urology. 2022;166:196–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kato S, Watanabe H, Yamasue K. Freeflow: The novel portable uroflowmeter can help to realize practical urinary conditions at home. Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2022;14(3):208–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. •• Lee HJ, Aslim EJ, Balamurali BT, Ng LYS, Kuo TLC, Lin CMY, et al. Development and validation of a deep learning system for sound-based prediction of urinary flow. Eur Urol Focus. 2023;9(1):209–15. Study of audio analysis of the uroflow pattern with use of machine deep learning to develop a smartphone-based test that can identify abnormal and normal flow based on audioflow analysis.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pandolfo SD, Crauso F, Aveta A, Cilio S, Barone B, Napolitano L, et al. A novel low-cost uroflowmetry for patient telemonitoring. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(4):3287.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Gallo GA, Cabral Dias Filho A, Cruz PR, Moraes CF. Development and construction of an open-platform, open-source low-cost portable uroflowmeter: The OpenFlow device. Neurourol Urodyn. 2024;43(1):153–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Rosier PFWM, Valdevenito JP, Smith P, Sinha S, Speich J, Gammie A. ICS-SUFU standard: Theory, terms, and recommendations for pressure-flow studies performance, analysis, and reporting, Part 1: Background theory and practice. Continence. 2023;100710.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cont.2023.100710.

  40. Bladt L, Kashtiara A, Platteau W, De Wachter S, De Win G. First-year experience of managing urology patients with home uroflowmetry: Descriptive retrospective analysis. JMIR Form Res. 2023;7:e51019.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Long Depaquit T, Michel F, Gaillet S, Savoie P-H, Karsenty G. Home uroflowmetry technics and clinical relevance: A narrative review. Prog Urol. 2022;32(17):1531–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Namiri NK, Cheema B, Lui H, Enriquez A, Rios N, Srirangapatanam S, et al. Characterizing voiding experiences of men choosing seated and standing positions. Neurourol Urodyn. 2020;39(8):2509–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Alrabadi A, Al Demour S, Mansi H, AlHamss S, Al OL. Evaluation of voiding position on uroflowmetry parameters and post void residual urine in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and healthy men. Am J Mens Health. 2020;14(4):1557988320938969.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Dönmez Mİ, Özkent MS, Hamarat MB, Kocalar M. Through the zipper or pants down: Does it change uroflowmetry parameters in healthy males? Low Urin Tract Symptoms. 2022;14(5):341–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Dogan S. Comparison of self-conducted and assistant-supervised uroflowmetry methods. Cureus. 2022;14(2):e22030.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Jin J, Chung Y, Kim W, Heo Y, Jeon J, Hoh J, et al. Classification of bladder emptying patterns by LSTM neural network trained using acoustic signatures. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(16):5328.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Schultz RE. Smartphone app for in-home uroflowmetry. Urol Pract. 2022;9(6):524–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Qi Y, Kong H, Kim Y. Estimation of urine flow velocity using millimeter-wave FMCW radar. Sensors (Basel). 2022;22(23):9402.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Han JH, Lee JH, Jun J, Park MU, Lee JS, Park S, et al. Validity and reliability of a home-based, guardian-conducted video voiding test for voiding evaluation after hypospadias surgery. Investig Clin Urol. 2020;61(4):425–31.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Rogel R, Lorenzo L, Avargues A, Lujan S, Broseta E, Arlandis S. ANalogical UroFlowmetry (ANUF): Correspondence between this new visual pictogram and uroflowmetry in men with lower urinary tract symptoms: A new approach for the study of male micturition dynamics. Urology. 2020;146:236–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding for this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Apollo Hospital, Hyderabad, India

    Sanjay Sinha

Authors
  1. Sanjay Sinha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

SS: All aspects of this work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sanjay Sinha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no competing interests.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Images are from author’s archive and have not been used in prior publication.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sinha, S. The Use of Uroflowmetry as a Diagnostic Test. Curr Urol Rep 25, 99–107 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-024-01200-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-024-01200-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation