Conducting the Urodynamic Study

  • Ahmed El-ZawahryEmail author


Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are often overlapping and unreliable making it difficult at times to reach a correct diagnosis. Multichannel urodynamics (UDS) testing measures different dynamic aspects of the lower urinary tract and translates patients’ subjective symptoms to more objective findings that may aid in making a proper diagnosis. Multichannel UDS is part of an integrated work process that includes history and physical examination as well as directed preliminary testing. This should include appropriate history and physical examination, voiding diary, post-void residual urine, and a pad test. Physician interpretation of the study findings should complement and integrate the clinical picture. The physician must be aware of challenges in study interpretation that may circumvent these goals, while remembering that proper counseling and pretest evaluation is crucial to optimize test results.


Stress Urinary Incontinence Pelvic Organ Prolapse Lower Urinary Tract Symptom Detrusor Overactivity Bladder Outlet Obstruction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Nitti VW. Urodynamic evaluation of the lower urinary tract. In: Kavoussi N, Parin P, editors. Campbell-Walsh urology, vol. 3. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2012. p. 1847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abrams P, Blaivas JB, Stanton SL, Andersen JT. The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function recommended by the International Continence Society. Int Urogynecol J. 1990;1:45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davis DM. The hydrodynamics of the upper urinary tract (urodynamics). Ann Surg. 1954;140(6):839–49.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chapple C, MacDiarmid S, Patel A. Urodynamics made easy. 3rd ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2009.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Winters JC, Dmochowski RR, Goldman HB, Herndon CD, Kobashi KC, Kraus SR, et al. Urodynamic studies in adults: AUA/SUFU guideline. J Urol. 2012;188(6 Suppl):2464–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tubaro A, Artibani W, Delancey J, Khullar V, Vierhout M, De Gennaro M, et al. Committee 7 B imaging and other investigations. In: Paul Abrams LC, Saad K, Alan W, editors. Incontinence: 4th international consultation on incontinence. 4th ed. Paris: Health Publication Ltd.; 2009. p. 541.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patel BN, Kobashi KC. Practical use of the new American Urological Association adult urodynamics guidelines. Curr Urol Rep. 2013;14(3):240–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Byrne DJ, Stewart PA, Gray BK. The role of urodynamics in female urinary stress incontinence. Br J Urol. 1987;59(3):228–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Summitt Jr RL, Stovall TG, Bent AE, Ostergard DR. Urinary incontinence: correlation of history and brief office evaluation with multichannel urodynamic testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(6 Pt 1):1835–40. discussion 40–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rovner ES, Wein AJ. Practical urodynamics. Part I. Houston: American Urological Association, Inc, Office of Education; 2002.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Almallah YZ, Rennie CD, Stone J, Lancashire MJ. Urinary tract infection and patient satisfaction after flexible cystoscopy and urodynamic evaluation. Urology. 2000;56(1):37–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yokoyama T, Nozaki K, Nose H, Inoue M, Nishiyama Y, Kumon H. Tolerability and morbidity of urodynamic testing: a questionnaire-based study. Urology. 2005;66(1):74–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, et al. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187(1):116–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abrams P, Blaivas JG, Stanton SL, Andersen JT. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function. The International Continence Society Committee on Standardisation of Terminology. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 1988;114:5–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abrams P, Andersson KE, Birder L, Brubaker L, Cardozo L, Chapple C, et al. Fourth International Consultation on Incontinence Recommendations of the International Scientific Committee: evaluation and treatment of urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and fecal incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(1):213–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chaikin D, Romanzi L, Rosenthal J, Weiss J, Blaivas J. The effect of genital prolapse on micturition. Neurourol Urodyn. 1988;17:344.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kaplan S, Dmochowski R, Cash B, Kopp Z, Berriman S, Khullar V. Systematic review of the relationship between bladder and bowel function: implications for patient management. Int J Clin Pract. 2013;67(13):205–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Abrams P. Urodynamics. 3rd ed. Singapore: Springer; 2006.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Blaiva J, Chancellor MB, Weiss J, Verhaaren M. Pre-urodynamic evaluation. In: Jerry B, Chancellor MB, Jeffrey W, Michael V, editors. Atlas of urodynamics. 2nd ed. Malden: Victoria Blackwell Publishing; 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Haylen BT, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Berghmans B, Lee J, et al. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(1):4–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Messelink B, Benson T, Berghmans B, Bo K, Corcos J, Fowler C, et al. Standardization of terminology of pelvic floor muscle function and dysfunction: report from the pelvic floor clinical assessment group of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2005;24(4):374–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vodusek DB. Evoked potential testing. Urol Clin North Am. 1996;23(3):427–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Blaivas JG, Zayed AA, Labib KB. The bulbocavernosus reflex in urology: a prospective study of 299 patients. J Urol. 1981;126(2):197–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stoller ML, Millard RJ. The accuracy of a catheterized residual urine. J Urol. 1989;141(1):15–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Purkiss SF. Assessment of residual urine in men following catheterisation. Br J Urol. 1990;66(3):279–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bano F, Arunkalaivanan AS, Barrington JW. Comparison between bladderscan, real-time ultrasound and suprapubic catheterisation in the measurement of female residual bladder volume. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;24(6):694–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Groutz A, Blaivas JG, Chaikin DC, Resnick NM, Engleman K, Anzalone D, et al. Noninvasive outcome measures of urinary incontinence and lower urinary tract symptoms: a multicenter study of micturition diary and pad tests. J Urol. 2000;164(3 Pt 1):698–701.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Haylen BT, Lee J, Logan V, Husselbee S, Zhou J, Law M. Immediate postvoid residual volumes in women with symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(6):1305–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Costantini E, Mearini E, Pajoncini C, Biscotto S, Bini V, Porena M. Uroflowmetry in female voiding disturbances. Neurourol Urodyn. 2003;22(6):569–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Radomski SB. Urodynamics of the female lower urinary tract, resting and stress urethral pressure profiles and leak point pressures. In: Drutz HP, Herschorn S, Diamant NE, editors. Female pelvic medicine and reconstructive pelvic surgery. London: Springer; 2003.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Addla S, Adeyouju A, Neilson D. Assessment of reliability of 1-day, 3-day and 7-day frequency volume charts. Eur Urol. 2004;3(2(Suppl)):130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Staskin D, Kelleher C, Bosch R, Coyne K, Cotterill N, Emmanuel A, et al. Initial assessment of urinary and faecal incontinence in adult male and female patients. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A, editors. Incontinence. 4th ed. Paris: Health Publication Ltd.; 2009.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Siltberg H, Victor A, Larsson G. Pad weighing tests: the best way to quantify urine loss in patients with incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl. 1997;166:28–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Blaivas J, Chancellor MB, Weiss J, WVerhaaren M. Atlas of urodynamics. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Choe JH, Lee JS, Seo JT. Urodynamic studies in women with stress urinary incontinence: significant bacteriuria and risk factors. Neurourol Urodyn. 2007;26(6):847–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lowder JL, Burrows LJ, Howden NL, Weber AM. Prophylactic antibiotics after urodynamics in women: a decision analysis. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18(2):159–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Brostrom S, Jennum P, Lose G. Morbidity of urodynamic investigation in healthy women. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002;13(3):182–4. discussion 4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Quek P, Tay LH. Morbidity and significant bacteriuria after urodynamic studies. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2004;33(6):754–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pannek J, Nehiba M. Morbidity of urodynamic testing in patients with spinal cord injury: is antibiotic prophylaxis necessary? Spinal Cord. 2007;45(12):771–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Latthe PM, Foon R, Toozs-Hobson P. Prophylactic antibiotics in urodynamics: a systematic review of effectiveness and safety. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(3):167–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gray M. Traces: making sense of urodynamics testing—part 4: preparing the patient for multichannel urodynamics testing. Urol Nurs. 2011;32(2):71–7.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Al-Hayek S, Belal M, Abrams P. Does the patient’s position influence the detection of detrusor overactivity? Neurourol Urodyn. 2008;27(4):279–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Klevmark B. Natural pressure–volume curves and conventional cystometry. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 1999;201:1–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Merrill DC. The air cystometer: a new instrument for evaluating bladder function. J Urol. 1971;106(6):865–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Scarpero HM, Padmanabhan P, Xue X, Nitti VW. Patient perception of videourodynamic testing: a questionnaire based study. J Urol. 2005;173(2):555–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gray M. Traces: making sense of urodynamics testing. Urol Nurs. 2010;30(5):267–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zhang P, Wu ZJ, Gao JZ. Impact of catheter on uroflow rate in pressure-flow study. Chin Med J (Engl). 2004;117(11):1732–4.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mortensen S, Lose G, Thyssen H. Repeatability of cystometry and pressure-flow parameters in female patients. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002;13(2):72–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Versi E. Discriminant analysis of urethral pressure profilometry data for the diagnosis of genuine stress incontinence. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1990;97(3):251–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryIncontinence Center, Southern Illinois UniversitySpringfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations