AimsTo assess in women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) the value of urodynamics prior to treatment.MethodsWe performed a multicenter non‐inferiority randomized controlled trial. Women with SUI were randomly allocated to management based on a workup with or without urodynamics. The primary outcome was clinical reduction of complaints as measured with the Urogenital Distress Inventory urinary incontinence subscale (UDI‐UI) at 12 months after the onset of treatment. A mean difference in improvement of less than 8 was considered non‐inferior. The study was analyzed according to intention‐to‐treat.ResultsThe trial was stopped prematurely because of slow recruitment. We randomly allocated 59 women to a strategy with (N = 31) or without (N = 28) urodynamics. The mean difference in improvement on the UDI‐UI was 14 in favor of the group without urodynamics (48 SD ± 22 vs. 34 SD ± 22, 95% CI: −28 to −0.26), confirming non‐inferiority. Addition of urodynamics did not result in a lower occurrence of de novo overactive bladder complaints compared to a workup without urodynamics (6/31 vs. 1/28; RR 5.4, 95% CI: 0.70–42). In the group allocated to urodynamics, initial surgical management was more often abandoned compared to the group not allocated to urodynamics (5/31 vs. 1/28; RR 4.5, 95% CI: 0.56–36).ConclusionsIn this relatively small study, the omission of urodynamics was not inferior to the use of urodynamics in the preoperative workup of women with SUI. Women with SUI undergoing urodynamics had the risk of a choice for more prudent treatment, which seemed to result in a delay until effective treatment. Neurourol. Urodynam. 31:1118–1123, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Objectives Researchers and clinicians tend to focus on one pelvic floor symptom (PFS) at the time. However, the pelvic floor acts as one functional unit, increasing the likelihood of concurrent PFS in patients with pelvic floor dysfunction. There is also a paucity of literature on the prevalence of concomitant PFS, especially in males. Therefore, we explored the occurrence of concomitant PFS in community‐dwelling males and females. Materials and Methods This prospective observational population‐based cohort study included males and females aged ≥16 years from a single Dutch municipality. Participants completed validated questionnaires on lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), defecation problems, sexual dysfunction, pelvic pain, and pelvic organ prolapse. Medical general practitioner records were examined. Furthermore, a randomly selected group of non‐responders aged <80 years received a short questionnaire, to study response bias. Results We invited 11 724 people, among which 839 females and 566 males completed the questionnaires. Of the female participants, 286 (34.1%) reported no PFS, and 251 (29.9%) reported two or more PFS. The most prevalent PFS clusters in females were sexual dysfunction and pelvic pain, sexual dysfunction and defecation problems, LUTS and defecation problems, and LUTS, defecation problems, and pelvic pain. Of the male participants, 212 (37.5%) reported no PFS, and 191 (33.7%) reported two or more PFS. The most prevalent clusters in males were sexual dysfunction and LUTS, defecation problems and LUTS, and sexual dysfunction, LUTS, and defecation problems. Conclusion A considerable overlap existed between PFS, with differences in PFS clusters between females and males. Of note, females reported pelvic pain more than males. We conclude that healthcare providers should address all PFS in males and females.

Background Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects up to 40% of parous women which adversely affects the quality of life. During a life time, 20% of all women will undergo an operation. In general the guidelines advise a vaginal operation in case of uterine descent: hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament plication (VH), sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) or a modified Manchester operation (MM). In the last decade, renewed interest in uterus sparing techniques has been observed. Previous studies have shown non-inferiority between SSH and VH. Whether or not SSH and MM are comparable concerning anatomical and functional outcome is still unknown. The practical application of both operations is at least in The Netherlands a known cause of practice pattern variation (PPV). To reveal any difference between both techniques the SAM-study was designed. Methods The SAM-study is a randomized controlled multicentre non-inferiority study which compares SSH and MM. Women with symptomatic POP in any stage, uterine descent and POP-Quantification (POP-Q) point D at ≤ minus 1 cm are eligible. The primary outcome is the composite outcome at two years of absence of prolapse beyond the hymen in any compartment, the absence of bulge symptoms and absence of reoperation for pelvic organ prolapse. Secondary outcomes are hospital parameters, surgery related morbidity/complications, pain perception, further treatments for prolapse or urinary incontinence, POP-Q anatomy in all compartments, quality-of-life, sexual function, and cost-effectiveness. Follow-up takes place at 6 weeks, 12 and 24 months. Additionally at 12 weeks, 6 and 9 months cost-effectiveness will be assessed. Validated questionnaires will be used and gynaecological examination will be performed. Analysis will be performed following the intention-to-treat and per protocol principle. With a non-inferiority margin of 9% and an expected loss to follow-up of 10%, 424 women will be needed to prove non-inferiority with a confidence interval of 95%. Discussion This study will evaluate the effectiveness and costs of SSH versus MM in women with primary POP. The evidence will show whether the existing PPV is detrimental and a de-implementation process regarding one of the operations is needed. Trial registration Dutch Trial Register (NTR 6978, http://www.trialregister.nl ). Date of registration: 29 January 2018. Prospectively registered.