Abstract
Aims: To gauge the current level of diagnostic utility of uroflowmetry and to suggest areas needing research to improve this. Methods: A summary of the debate held at the 2017 meeting of the International Consultation on Incontinence Research Society, with subsequent analysis by the authors. Results: Limited diagnostic sensitivity and specificity exist for maximum flow rates, multiple uroflow measurements, and flow-volume nomograms. There is a lack of clarity in flow rate curve shape description and uroflow time measurement. Conclusions: There is a need for research to combine uroflowmetry with other non-invasive indicators. Better standardizations of test technique, flow-volume nomograms, uroflow shape descriptions, and time measurements are required.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | S20-S24 |
Journal | Neurourology and Urodynamics |
Volume | 37 |
Early online date | 9 Jan 2018 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Jun 2018 |
Keywords
- non-invasive
- uroflowmetry