Urodynamics Profile in Department of Urology Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital Between 2015-2018

Non-Moderated Poster Session

12:30 PM - 1:30 PM

dr. Harrina Erlianti Rahardjo (1), dr. Soefiannagoya Soedarman (2)

(1) Urology FMUI RSCM & Indonesia Continence Society, Central Jakarta, Indonesia, (2) Department of Urology FMUI RSCM, Central Jakarta, Indonesia

Urodynamics examination is the gold standard for diagnosing voiding disorder, and the pathophysiology behind them. Database on voiding dysfunction and urodynamics results are still scarce in Indonesia. Therefore, this study aimed to report the urodynamics profile in Department of Urology Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Indonesia, including clinical and urodynamics diagnosis.

AIMS

Data was retrieved from medical records of patients who underwent urodynamics in Department of Urology Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital from year 2015-2018.

METHODS

559 patients underwent urodynamics from 2015-2018 with average of 140 patients per year. The most common pre-urodynamics clinical diagnosis was LUTS (47%) followed by urinary retention, overactive bladder (OAB), stress incontinence, and pediatric voiding dysfunction (31%, 9%, 8% and 6% respectively). From 261 LUTS patients, the urodynamics findings revealed 141(54%) small bladder capacity, 88(34%) reduced compliance, 29(11%) detrusor overactivity (DO), 8(3%) DO with incontinence, 12(5%) urodynamic stress incontinence during the filling phase. Detrusor underactivity (DU), bladder outflow obstruction (BOO), and mixed of BOO and DU were found in 55%, 33% and 3% of patients respectively. Out of 170 urinary retention patients, we found 85(50%) patients with DU, 57(34%) BOO, and 26(15%) acontractile bladder. Small bladder capacity (60%) and detrusor overactivity (40%) were the most common findings in OAB patients. Two of OAB patients showed urodynamic stress incontinence during urodynamics. On the contratry, 21% of patients with complaints of stress urinary incontinence showed detrusor overactivity. Among pediatric patients, LUTS and incontinence complaint were the most common pre-urodynamics diagnosis (58%,15%),

RESULTS

This study implies the role of urodynamics in diagnosing patients with various complaints of lower urinary tract problems. Furthermore, after urodynamics, problems in filling and voiding phase can be determined so that optimal treatment could be tailored based on patients’ individual needs.

CONCLUSIONS