Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Current State of the Art in Non-Invasive Urodynamics

  • Voiding Dysfunction Evaluation (H Atiemo, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) are highly prevalent and bothersome. The pressure flow or voiding part of urodynamics gives information regarding detrusor contractility and whether bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) is present. However, urodynamics are invasive and can be associated with infection and take time to perform. Moreover it is not clear whether urodynamics are beneficial in assessing LUTS routinely or whether they are able to predict outcomes following surgery for obstruction. As a result several non-invasive techniques and investigations have been developed to try to aid in the work up and management of patients with LUTS / BPE. A PubMed search was performed to review the literature on non-invasive urodynamic tests for voiding dysfunction. Techniques include transition zone index, intravesical prostatic protrusion, prostate circle area ratio, prostatic urethral angle, resistive index, bladder wall and detrusor wall thickness, ultrasound estimated bladder weight, near infrared spectroscopy, condom catheter and penile cuff compression techniques and are summarized in this review.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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

  1. Coyne KS, Sexton CC, Thompson CL, Milsom I, Irwin D, Kopp ZS, et al. The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in the USA, the UK and Sweden: results from the Epidemiology of LUTS (EpiLUTS) study. BJU Int. 2009;104(3):352–60. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08427.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sexton CC, Coyne KS, Kopp ZS, Irwin DE, Milsom I, Aiyer LP, et al. The overlap of storage, voiding and postmicturition symptoms and implications for treatment seeking in the USA, UK and Sweden: EpiLUTS. BJU Int. 2009;103 Suppl 3Suppl 3:12–23. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08369.x.

  3. Chapple CR, Roehrborn CG. A shifted paradigm for the further understanding, evaluation, and treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men: focus on the bladder. Eur Urol. 2006;49(4):651–8. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.02.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Oelke M, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A, Emberton M, Gravas S, Michel MC, et al. Guidelines on the Management of Male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS), including Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO). EAU Guidelines, edition presented at the 27th EAU Annual Congress, Paris 2012. 2012.

  5. •• Parsons BA, Bright E, Shaban AM, Whitehouse A, Drake MJ. The role of invasive and non-invasive urodynamics in male voiding lower urinary tract symptoms. World J Urol. 2011;29(2):191–7. doi:10.1007/s00345-009-0488-8. Comprehensive recent review on the subject.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kranse R, van Mastrigt R. Weak correlation between bladder outlet obstruction and probability to void to completion. Urology. 2003;62(4):667–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dunsmuir WD, Feneley M, Corry DA, Bryan J, Kirby RS. The day-to-day variation (test-retest reliability) of residual urine measurement. Br J Urol. 1996;77(2):192–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schafer 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. doi:10.1002/nau.10066.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. NICE. The management of lower urinary tract symptoms in men NICE guidelines. 2010:1-353.

  10. Abrams P. Urodynamics. 3rd ed. London: Springer; 2006.

  11. Reynard JM, Yang Q, Donovan JL, Peters TJ, Schafer W, de la Rosette JJ, et al. The ICS-'BPH' Study: uroflowmetry, lower urinary tract symptoms and bladder outlet obstruction. Br J Urol. 1998;82(5):619–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Witjes WP, Aarnink RG, Ezz-el-Din K, Wijkstra H, Debruyne EM, de la Rosette JJ. The correlation between prostate volume, transition zone volume, transition zone index and clinical and urodynamic investigations in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Br J Urol. 1997;80(1):84–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lovvik A, Yaqub S, Oustad H, Sand TE, Nitti VW. Can noninvasive evaluation of benign prostatic obstruction be optimized? Curr Opin Urol. 2012;22(1):1–6. doi:10.1097/MOU.0b013e32834d8e74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. • Zhang X, Li G, Wei X, Mo X, Hu L, Zha Y, et al. Resistive index of prostate capsular arteries: a newly identified parameter to diagnose and assess bladder outlet obstruction in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 2012;188(3):881–7. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2012.04.114. Recent article correlating resisitive index in those with and without BOO.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Shinbo H, Kurita Y, Takada S, Imanishi T, Otsuka A, Furuse H, et al. Resistive index as risk factor for acute urinary retention in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 2010;76(6):1440–5. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2010.04.026.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Shinbo H, Kurita Y, Nakanishi T, Imanishi T, Otsuka A, Furuse H, et al. Resistive index: a newly identified predictor of outcome of transurethral prostatectomy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 2010;75(1):143–7. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.08.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. St Sauver JL, Jacobson DJ, McGree ME, Girman CJ, Nehra A, Lieber MM, et al. Presumed circle area ratio of the prostate in a community-based group of men. BJU Int. 2009;104(1):58–62. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08354.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kojima M, Ochiai A, Naya Y, Ukimura O, Watanabe M, Watanabe H. Correlation of presumed circle area ratio with infravesical obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology. 1997;50(4):548–55. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(97)00310-5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee LS, Sim HG, Lim KB, Wang D, Foo KT. Intravesical prostatic protrusion predicts clinical progression of benign prostatic enlargement in patients receiving medical treatment. Int J Urol. 2010;17(1):69–74. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2009.02409.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. • Franco G, De Nunzio C, Leonardo C, Tubaro A, Ciccariello M, De Dominicis C, et al. Ultrasound assessment of intravesical prostatic protrusion and detrusor wall thickness–new standards for noninvasive bladder outlet obstruction diagnosis? J Urol. 2010;183(6):2270–4. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.02.019. Rcent article correlating IPP and DWT with BOO.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cumpanas AA, Botoca M, Minciu R, Bucuras V. Intravesical prostatic protrusion can be a predicting factor for the treatment outcome in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic obstruction treated with tamsulosin. Urology. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2012.12.007.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Seo YM, Kim HJ. Impact of intravesical protrusion of the prostate in the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms/benign prostatic hyperplasia of moderate size by alpha receptor antagonist. Int Neurourol J. 2012;16(4):187–90. doi:10.5213/inj.2012.16.4.187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lee JW, Ryu JH, Yoo TK, Byun SS, Jeong YJ, Jung TY. Relationship between intravesical prostatic protrusion and postoperative outcomes in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Korean J Urol. 2012;53(7):478–82. doi:10.4111/kju.2012.53.7.478.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yuen JS, Ngiap JT, Cheng CW, Foo KT. Effects of bladder volume on transabdominal ultrasound measurements of intravesical prostatic protrusion and volume. Int J Urol. 2002;9(4):225–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ku JH, Ko DW, Cho JY, Oh SJ. Correlation between prostatic urethral angle and bladder outlet obstruction index in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology. 2010;75(6):1467–71. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.08.049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Park YJ, Bae KH, Jin BS, Jung HJ, Park JS. Is increased prostatic urethral angle related to lower urinary tract symptoms in males with benign prostatic hyperplasia/lower urinary tract symptoms? Korean J Urol. 2012;53(6):410–3. doi:10.4111/kju.2012.53.6.410.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bang WJ, Kim HW, Lee JY, Lee DH, Hah YS, Lee HH, et al. Prostatic urethral angulation associated with urinary flow rate and urinary symptom scores in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology. 2012;80(6):1333–7. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2012.08.058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Elwagdy S, Samy E, Sayed M, Gamal AH. Benign prostatic hyperplasia: clinical benefits on Three-Dimensional Ultrasound eXtended Imaging (3D-XI). Int J Urol. 2008;15(4):332–9. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.01988.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. • Bright E, Oelke M, Tubaro A, Abrams P. Ultrasound estimated bladder weight and measurement of bladder wall thickness—useful noninvasive methods for assessing the lower urinary tract? J Urol. 2010;184(5):1847–54. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.06.006. Excellent review on BWT, DWT and UEBW as non-invasine urodynamic tests.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Levin RM, Haugaard N, O'Connor L, Buttyan R, Das A, Dixon JS, et al. Obstructive response of human bladder to BPH vs. rabbit bladder response to partial outlet obstruction: a direct comparison. Neurourol Urodyn. 2000;19(5):609–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Oelke M, Hofner K, Jonas U, Ubbink D, de la Rosette J, Wijkstra H. Ultrasound measurement of detrusor wall thickness in healthy adults. Neurourol Urodyn. 2006;25(4):308–17. doi:10.1002/nau.20242. discussion 18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Manieri C, Carter SS, Romano G, Trucchi A, Valenti M, Tubaro A. The diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction in men by ultrasound measurement of bladder wall thickness. J Urol. 1998;159(3):761–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Hakenberg OW, Linne C, Manseck A, Wirth MP. Bladder wall thickness in normal adults and men with mild lower urinary tract symptoms and benign prostatic enlargement. Neurourol Urodyn. 2000;19(5):585–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Blatt AH, Titus J, Chan L. Ultrasound measurement of bladder wall thickness in the assessment of voiding dysfunction. J Urol. 2008;179(6):2275–8. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.118. discussion 8-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Park JS, Lee HW, Lee SW, Moon HS, Park HY, Kim YT. Bladder wall thickness is associated with responsiveness of storage symptoms to alpha-blockers in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Korean J Urol. 2012;53(7):487–91. doi:10.4111/kju.2012.53.7.487.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Oelke M, Hofner K, Wiese B, Grunewald V, Jonas U. Increase in detrusor wall thickness indicates bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in men. World J Urol. 2002;19(6):443–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Kessler TM, Gerber R, Burkhard FC, Studer UE, Danuser H. Ultrasound assessment of detrusor thickness in men-can it predict bladder outlet obstruction and replace pressure flow study? J Urol. 2006;175(6):2170–3. doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(06)00316-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Oelke M, Hofner K, Jonas U, de la Rosette JJ, Ubbink DT, Wijkstra H. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive tests to evaluate bladder outlet obstruction in men: detrusor wall thickness, uroflowmetry, postvoid residual urine, and prostate volume. Eur Urol. 2007;52(3):827–34. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.12.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Oelke M. International Consultation on Incontinence-Research Society (ICI-RS) report on non-invasive urodynamics: the need of standardization of ultrasound bladder and detrusor wall thickness measurements to quantify bladder wall hypertrophy. Neurourol Urodyn. 2010;29(4):634–9. doi:10.1002/nau.20834.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kojima M, Inui E, Ochiai A, Naya Y, Ukimura O, Watanabe H. Ultrasonic estimation of bladder weight as a measure of bladder hypertrophy in men with infravesical obstruction: a preliminary report. Urology. 1996;47(6):942–7. doi:10.1016/s0090-4295(96)00059-3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Naya Y, Kojima M, Honjyo H, Ochiai A, Ukimura O, Watanabe H. Intraobserver and interobserver variance in the measurement of ultrasound-estimated bladder weight. Ultrasound Med Bio. 1998;24(5):771–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Bright E, Pearcy R, Abrams P. Ultrasound estimated bladder weight in men attending the uroflowmetry clinic. Neurourol Urodyn. 2011;30(4):583–6. doi:10.1002/nau.21049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kojima M, Inui E, Ochiai A, Naya Y, Ukimura O, Watanabe H. Noninvasive quantitative estimation of infravesical obstruction using ultrasonic measurement of bladder weight. J Urol. 1997;157(2):476–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Ochiai A, Kojima M. Correlation of ultrasound-estimated bladder weight with ultrasound appearance of the prostate and postvoid residual urine in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology. 1998;51(5):722–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Miyashita H, Kojima M, Miki T. Ultrasonic measurement of bladder weight as a possible predictor of acute urinary retention in men with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Ultrasound Med Bio. 2002;28(8):985–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Akino H, Maekawa M, Nakai M, Shioyama R, Ishida H, Oyama N, et al. Ultrasound-estimated bladder weight predicts risk of surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia in men using alpha-adrenoceptor blocker for LUTS. Urology. 2008;72(4):817–20. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2008.04.058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Kojima M, Inui E, Ochiai A, Naya Y, Kamoi K, Ukimura O, et al. Reversible change of bladder hypertrophy due to benign prostatic hyperplasia after surgical relief of obstruction. J Urol. 1997;158(1):89–93. doi:10.1097/00005392-199707000-00024.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Han DH, Lee HW, Sung HH, Lee HN, Lee YS, Lee KS. The diagnostic efficacy of 3-dimensional ultrasound estimated bladder weight corrected for body surface area as an alternative nonurodynamic parameter of bladder outlet obstruction. J Urol. 2011;185(3):964–9. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.10.049.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Almeida FG, Freitas DG, Bruschini H. Is the ultrasound-estimated bladder weight a reliable method for evaluating bladder outlet obstruction? BJU Int. 2011;108(6):864–7. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09881.x.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. • Huang T, Qi J, Yu YJ, Xu D, Jiao Y, Kang J, et al. Predictive value of resistive index, detrusor wall thickness and ultrasound estimated bladder weight regarding the outcome after transurethral prostatectomy for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of benign prostatic obstruction. Int J Urol. 2012;19(4):343–50. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2042.2011.02942.x. Assessment of RI, DWT and UEBW in predicting outcomes of TURP.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Macnab AJ, Stothers L. Near-infrared spectroscopy: validation of bladder-outlet obstruction assessment using non-invasive parameters. Can J Urol. 2008;15(5):4241–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Stothers L, Guevara R, Macnab A. Classification of male lower urinary tract symptoms using mathematical modelling and a regression tree algorithm of noninvasive near-infrared spectroscopy parameters. Eur Urol. 2010;57(2):327–32. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2009.05.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Yurt M, Suer E, Gulpinar O, Telli O, Arikan N. Diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms: comparison of near infrared spectroscopy algorithm and pressure flow study in a prospective study. Urology. 2012;80(1):182–6. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2012.03.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Chung DE, Lee RK, Kaplan SA, Te AE. Concordance of near infrared spectroscopy with pressure flow studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. J Urol. 2010;184(6):2434–9. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. van Mastrigt R. Non invasive bladder pressure measurement. Methodology and reproducibility. Neurourol Urodyn. 1994;14:480–1.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Gommer ED, Vanspauwen TJ, Miklosi M, Wen JG, Kinder MV, Janknegt RA, et al. Validity of a non-invasive determination of the isovolumetric bladder pressure during voiding in men with LUTS. Neurourol Urodyn. 1999;18(5):477–86.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Walter JS, Andros G, Stokes S, Wheeler JS, Damaser M, Sacks J, et al. Urodynamic verification of noninvasive back-pressure recordings from the urinary bladder. Tech Urol. 1998;4(4):185–91.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Van Mastrigt R, Pel JJ. Towards a noninvasive urodynamic diagnosis of infravesical obstruction. BJU Int. 1999;84(2):195–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. van Mastrigt R, Huang Foen Chung JW. Bladder volume sensitivity of isovolumetric intravesical pressure. Neurourol Urodyn. 2006;25(7):744–51. doi:10.1002/nau.20202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Pel J, van Mastrigt R. Non-invasively diagnosing infravesical obstruction in male patients. Neurourol Urodyn. 1998;17:394–5.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Pel JJ, Bosch JL, Blom JH, Lycklama a Nijeholt AA, van Mastrigt R. Development of a non-invasive strategy to classify bladder outlet obstruction in male patients with LUTS. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(2):117–25. doi:10.1002/nau.10046.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Mastrigt R, Huang Foen Chung JW. Comparison of repeatability of non-invasive and invasive urodynamics. Neurourol Urodyn. 2004;23(4):317–21. doi:10.1002/nau.20043.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Huang Foen Chung JW, Bohnen AM, Pel JJ, Bosch JL, Niesing R, van Mastrigt R. Applicability and reproducibility of condom catheter method for measuring isovolumetric bladder pressure. Urology. 2004;63(1):56–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Huang Foen Chung JW, van Mastrigt R. Correlation of non-invasive urodynamics with International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and prostate volume. Neurourol Urodyn. 2005;24(1):25–30. doi:10.1002/nau.20073.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. de Zeeuw S, van Mastrigt R. Increased postvoid residual volume after measuring the isovolumetric bladder pressure using the noninvasive condom catheter method. BJU Int. 2007;100(6):1293–7. doi:10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07203.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Pel JJ, van Mastrigt R. A flow rate cut-off value as a criterion for the accurate non-invasive measurement of bladder pressure using a condom-type catheter. Urol Res. 2003;31(3):177–82. doi:10.1007/s00240-003-0312-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. D'Ancona CA, Bassani JW, Querne FA, Carvalho J, Oliveira RR, Netto Jr NR. New method for minimally invasive urodynamic assessment in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Urology. 2008;71(1):75–8. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2007.08.036.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Gleason DM, Bottaccini MR, McRae LP. Noninvasive urodynamics: a study of male voiding dysfunction. Neurourol Urodyn. 1997;16(2):93–100.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. McRae LP, Bottaccini MR, Gleason DM. Noninvasive quantitative method for measuring isovolumetric bladder pressure and urethral resistance in the male: I. Experimental validation of the theory. Neurourol Urodyn. 1995;14(2):101–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Griffiths CJ, Rix D, MacDonald AM, Drinnan MJ, Pickard RS, Ramsden PD. Noninvasive measurement of bladder pressure by controlled inflation of a penile cuff. J Urol. 2002;167(3):1344–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Sullivan MP, Yalla SV. Penile urethral compression-release maneuver as a non-invasive screening test for diagnosing prostatic obstruction. Neurourol Urodyn. 2000;19(6):657–69.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Harding CK, Robson W, Drinnan MJ, Griffiths CJ, Ramsden PD, Pickard RS. An automated penile compression release maneuver as a noninvasive test for diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction. J Urol. 2004;172(6 Pt 1):2312–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. McIntosh SL, Drinnan MJ, Griffiths CJ, Robson WA, Ramsden PD, Pickard RS. Noninvasive assessment of bladder contractility in men. J Urol. 2004;172(4 Pt 1):1394–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Drinnan MJ, McIntosh SL, Robson WA, Pickard RS, Ramsden PD, Griffiths CJ. Inter-observer agreement in the estimation of bladder pressure using a penile cuff. Neurourol Urodyn. 2003;22(4):296–300. doi:10.1002/nau.10133.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Borrini L, Lukacs B, Ciofu C, Gaibisso B, Haab F, Amarenco G. Predictive value of the penile cuff-test for the assessment of bladder outlet obstruction in men. Progres en urologie: journal de l'Association francaise d'urologie et de la Societe francaise d'urologie. 2012;22(11):657–64. doi:10.1016/j.purol.2012.07.017.

  76. Drinnan MJ, Pickard RS, Ramsden PD, Griffiths CJ. Assessment of prostatic obstruction: a cuff may be enough. Neurourol Urodyn. 2003;22(1):40–4. doi:10.1002/nau.10059.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Harding CK, Robson W, Drinnan MJ, Ramsden PD, Griffiths C, Pickard RS. Variation in invasive and noninvasive measurements of isovolumetric bladder pressure and categorization of obstruction according to bladder volume. J Urol. 2006;176(1):172–6. doi:10.1016/S0022-5347(06)00497-6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Griffiths CJ, Harding C, Blake C, McIntosh S, Drinnan MJ, Robson WA, et al. A nomogram to classify men with lower urinary tract symptoms using urine flow and noninvasive measurement of bladder pressure. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1323–6. discussion 6; author reply 6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Harding C, Robson W, Drinnan M, Sajeel M, Ramsden P, Griffiths C, et al. Predicting the outcome of prostatectomy using noninvasive bladder pressure and urine flow measurements. Eur Urol. 2007;52(1):186–92. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.11.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Clarkson B, Griffiths C, McArdle F, Pickard R, Drinnan M. Continuous non-invasive measurement of bladder voiding pressure using an experimental constant low-flow test. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31(4):557–63. doi:10.1002/nau.21170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

AS, PD acknowledge financial support from the Department of Health via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre award to Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with King's College London and King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. They also acknowledges the support of the MRC Centre for Transplantation.

JP acknowledges receiving financial support from the National Institute for Health Research University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre.

Dirk De Ridder is a senior clinical researcher of the Flemish fund for scientific research (FWO Vlaanderen)

Conflict of Interest

Arun Sahai declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Jai Seth declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Frank Van der Aa declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Jalesh Panicker declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Dirk De Ridder declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Prokar Dasgupta declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. MRC Centre for Transplantation, King’s College London, King’s Health Partners, Department of Urology, Guy’s Hospital, London, SE1 9RT, UK

    A. Sahai & P. Dasgupta

  2. Department of Uroneurology, UCL Institute of Neurology and The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery, Queen Square, London, UK

    J. Seth & J. Panicker

  3. Department of Urology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    F. Van der Aa & D. De Ridder

Authors
  1. A. Sahai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Seth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. F. Van der Aa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Panicker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. De Ridder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. P. Dasgupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Sahai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sahai, A., Seth, J., Van der Aa, F. et al. Current State of the Art in Non-Invasive Urodynamics. Curr Bladder Dysfunct Rep 8, 83–91 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-013-0181-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11884-013-0181-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation