Use of the penile cuff test to diagnose bladder outlet obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Pub Date : 2022-06-18 DOI:10.1111/luts.12454
Lakshay Khosla, Alia Codelia-Anjum, Christina Sze, Susana Martinez Diaz, Kevin C. Zorn, Naeem Bhojani, Dean Elterman, Bilal Chughtai
{"title":"Use of the penile cuff test to diagnose bladder outlet obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Lakshay Khosla,&nbsp;Alia Codelia-Anjum,&nbsp;Christina Sze,&nbsp;Susana Martinez Diaz,&nbsp;Kevin C. Zorn,&nbsp;Naeem Bhojani,&nbsp;Dean Elterman,&nbsp;Bilal Chughtai","doi":"10.1111/luts.12454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Among noninvasive modalities for assessing bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), the penile cuff test (PCT) is the most used in clinical practice. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the performance of PCT in diagnosing and managing BOO.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for studies investigating use of PCT for BOO. Studies evaluating diagnostic parameters, inter-observer agreements, or treatment outcomes using PCT were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol was followed (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022300047). A proportional meta-analysis was done for diagnostic accuracy proportions. The Egger's and the Begg-Mazumdar rank-correlation tests were used to assess publication bias. Risk of bias was assessed using the Gradings of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of the 272 articles retrieved, 17 were included in qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis was performed on five studies (comprising 448 patients). Two studies evaluating inter-observer agreement demonstrated 95% agreement and five studies evaluating procedures reported a 66%-80% surgical success rate on obstructed patients using PCT. From the proportional meta-analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were 0.85 (95% CI 0.71-0.95) 0.78 (95% CI 0.67-0.87), 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-0.91), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-0.96), respectively. Publication bias was noted for PPV but not for sensitivity, specificity, or NPV. Based on the GRADE criteria, there were two low, six moderate, and nine high-quality studies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>PCT performs sufficiently in diagnosing and managing BOO. However, due to variability in obstruction criteria assessment, more studies comparing diagnostic criteria are warranted.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18028,"journal":{"name":"LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/luts.12454","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose

Among noninvasive modalities for assessing bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), the penile cuff test (PCT) is the most used in clinical practice. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the performance of PCT in diagnosing and managing BOO.

Materials and Methods

PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for studies investigating use of PCT for BOO. Studies evaluating diagnostic parameters, inter-observer agreements, or treatment outcomes using PCT were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol was followed (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022300047). A proportional meta-analysis was done for diagnostic accuracy proportions. The Egger's and the Begg-Mazumdar rank-correlation tests were used to assess publication bias. Risk of bias was assessed using the Gradings of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria.

Results

Of the 272 articles retrieved, 17 were included in qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis was performed on five studies (comprising 448 patients). Two studies evaluating inter-observer agreement demonstrated 95% agreement and five studies evaluating procedures reported a 66%-80% surgical success rate on obstructed patients using PCT. From the proportional meta-analysis, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were 0.85 (95% CI 0.71-0.95) 0.78 (95% CI 0.67-0.87), 0.74 (95% CI 0.52-0.91), and 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-0.96), respectively. Publication bias was noted for PPV but not for sensitivity, specificity, or NPV. Based on the GRADE criteria, there were two low, six moderate, and nine high-quality studies.

Conclusions

PCT performs sufficiently in diagnosing and managing BOO. However, due to variability in obstruction criteria assessment, more studies comparing diagnostic criteria are warranted.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用阴茎套试验诊断膀胱出口梗阻:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析
目的在评估膀胱出口梗阻(BOO)的无创方法中,阴茎袖试验(PCT)是临床应用最多的方法。本综述的目的是评价PCT在诊断和治疗BOO中的表现。材料与方法检索PubMed、Scopus、CINAHL、Embase、Cochrane Library和Web of Science,查找有关BOO使用PCT的研究。包括使用PCT评估诊断参数、观察者间协议或治疗结果的研究。遵循系统评价和荟萃分析方案的首选报告项目(PROSPERO ID: CRD42022300047)。对诊断准确性比例进行了比例荟萃分析。Egger’s和Begg-Mazumdar秩相关检验用于评估发表偏倚。采用推荐、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)标准评估偏倚风险。结果在检索到的272篇文献中,17篇纳入定性综合,对5项研究(包括448名患者)进行了meta分析。两项评估观察者间一致性的研究显示95%的一致性,五项评估方法的研究报告使用PCT治疗梗阻患者的手术成功率为66%-80%。从比例荟萃分析中,敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)分别为0.85 (95% CI 0.71-0.95)、0.78 (95% CI 0.67-0.87)、0.74 (95% CI 0.52-0.91)和0.87 (95% CI 0.73-0.96)。发表偏倚出现在PPV上,但未出现在敏感性、特异性或NPV上。根据GRADE标准,有2项低、6项中等和9项高质量研究。结论PCT对BOO有较好的诊断和治疗效果。然而,由于阻塞标准评估的可变性,需要进行更多的比较诊断标准的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
LUTS: Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
52
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: LUTS is designed for the timely communication of peer-reviewed studies which provides new clinical and basic science information to physicians and researchers in the field of neurourology, urodynamics and urogynecology. Contributions are reviewed and selected by a group of distinguished referees from around the world, some of whom constitute the journal''s Editorial Board. The journal covers both basic and clinical research on lower urinary tract dysfunctions (LUTD), such as overactive bladder (OAB), detrusor underactivity, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), bladder outlet obstruction (BOO), urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse (POP), painful bladder syndrome (PBS), as well as on other relevant conditions. Case reports are published only if new findings are provided. LUTS is an official journal of the Japanese Continence Society, the Korean Continence Society, and the Taiwanese Continence Society. Submission of papers from all countries are welcome. LUTS has been accepted into Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) with a 2011 Impact Factor.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Definition Change and Update of Clinical Guidelines for Interstitial Cystitis and Bladder Pain Syndrome Androgenic Alopecia Is Associated With More Severe Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Secondary to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Predictors of Postoperative Urinary Incontinence After Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP) for Surgeons Early in Their Experience Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in short-circuit outpatient care: Is prostatic volume a limiting factor?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1