We have located links that may give you full text access.
Does sacral ratio have any impact on success rate of biofeedback therapy in children with lower urinary tract dysfunction?
Journal of Pediatric Urology 2024 March 27
INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the possible impact of patients' sacral ratios (SRs) on response to biofeedback (BF) therapy in pediatric patients with lower urinary tract dysfunction (LUTD).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort conducted from 2016 to 2018 in our tertiary medical center, we included the medical records of all pediatric patients with LUTD who were nominated for BF due to having abnormal uroflowmetry patterns and simultaneous increase in electromyography (EMG) activity. Ten sessions of weekly animated BF were performed for each patient. All patients underwent a complete urological evaluation, uroflowmetry with simultaneous EMG and post-void residual measurement before and after treatment. SRs were calculated based on plain anteroposterior lumbosacral radiographs. Patients were then divided into normal SR (≥0.74) and low SR (<0.74) and outcomes were compared between them.
RESULTS: Of the total 86 patients included in our study, 48 (55.8%) had a normal SR (≥0.74), while 38 (44.2%) had a low SR (<0.74). Our data revealed that BF therapy significantly improved maximum and average urinary flow rates, urine volume, daytime urinary incontinence, enuresis, urinary urgency and constipation; irrespective of the patients' SRs (all P < 0.001). Our between-groups analyses showed that after the completion of BF, the SR ≥ 0.74 group had significantly higher maximum urinary flow rate (mean difference [95%CI]: 7.7 [5.4, 10.0], P < 0.001) (Figure) and urine volume (mean difference [95%CI]: 49.9 [19.5, 80.4], P = 0.002) and significantly lower diurnal urinary incontinence (4.2% vs. 21.1%, P = 0.020), enuresis (4.2% vs. 18.4%, P = 0.040) and constipation (2.1% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.004) compared to the SR < 0.74 group.
DISCUSSION: SR has been proposed as a reliable indicator of bony pelvis growth and subsequent lumbosacral neurodevelopment. Additionally, larger SR values are associated with better postoperative sphincter function in children with urological and anorectal malformations. Our results demonstrated that after completion of BF, the normal SR group had a significantly better improvement of some of the uroflowmetry indicators and LUTD-associated symptoms compared to the low SR group.
CONCLUSION: Our findings implied that although BF therapy is an efficient treatment for children with LUTD, irrespective of their sacral development; children with enhanced sacral development may benefit from better clinical response, especially in terms of LUTD-associated symptoms.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cohort conducted from 2016 to 2018 in our tertiary medical center, we included the medical records of all pediatric patients with LUTD who were nominated for BF due to having abnormal uroflowmetry patterns and simultaneous increase in electromyography (EMG) activity. Ten sessions of weekly animated BF were performed for each patient. All patients underwent a complete urological evaluation, uroflowmetry with simultaneous EMG and post-void residual measurement before and after treatment. SRs were calculated based on plain anteroposterior lumbosacral radiographs. Patients were then divided into normal SR (≥0.74) and low SR (<0.74) and outcomes were compared between them.
RESULTS: Of the total 86 patients included in our study, 48 (55.8%) had a normal SR (≥0.74), while 38 (44.2%) had a low SR (<0.74). Our data revealed that BF therapy significantly improved maximum and average urinary flow rates, urine volume, daytime urinary incontinence, enuresis, urinary urgency and constipation; irrespective of the patients' SRs (all P < 0.001). Our between-groups analyses showed that after the completion of BF, the SR ≥ 0.74 group had significantly higher maximum urinary flow rate (mean difference [95%CI]: 7.7 [5.4, 10.0], P < 0.001) (Figure) and urine volume (mean difference [95%CI]: 49.9 [19.5, 80.4], P = 0.002) and significantly lower diurnal urinary incontinence (4.2% vs. 21.1%, P = 0.020), enuresis (4.2% vs. 18.4%, P = 0.040) and constipation (2.1% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.004) compared to the SR < 0.74 group.
DISCUSSION: SR has been proposed as a reliable indicator of bony pelvis growth and subsequent lumbosacral neurodevelopment. Additionally, larger SR values are associated with better postoperative sphincter function in children with urological and anorectal malformations. Our results demonstrated that after completion of BF, the normal SR group had a significantly better improvement of some of the uroflowmetry indicators and LUTD-associated symptoms compared to the low SR group.
CONCLUSION: Our findings implied that although BF therapy is an efficient treatment for children with LUTD, irrespective of their sacral development; children with enhanced sacral development may benefit from better clinical response, especially in terms of LUTD-associated symptoms.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
Management of Diverticulitis: A Review.JAMA Surgery 2024 April 18
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app