In clinical practice, many patients cannot empty their bladders within an acceptable duration. Common complaints include weak urinary stream and incomplete emptying, which may affect quality of life. Bladder emptying requires sufficient detrusor contractile power, velocity, and durability. The urodynamic term for inadequate detrusor contraction is detrusor underactivity (DU). Although this definition was provided by the ICS, it may not be clinically practical. Analogous to the relationship between overactive bladder (OAB) and detrusor overactivity (DO), the symptom complex caused by DU is termed underactive bladder (UAB). Many conditions lead to UAB, such as advanced age, neurogenic bladder and BOO, but the definite pathophysiology directly leading to UAB is still being widely studied without a widely-accepted consensus. The preferred mainstream treatment for increased residual urine volume caused by UAB is intermittent catheterization, while pharmacotherapy is still disappointing after decades of development. There are no studies on surgical treatment for UAB with an acceptable level of evidence. We reviewed the recent literature on UAB and DU to provide a comprehensive discussion of the related presentation, etiology, diagnosis and management.

The present retrospective study aimed to examine the outcomes of stage II-IV upper-tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) and determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy is a beneficial treatment for patients with locally advanced UTUC (specifically, stage III-IV). The analysis included 126 patients with muscle-invasive UTUC who were treated between June 2003 and June 2012. All patients underwent laparoscopic or open nephroureterectomy and bladder cuff excision. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were assessed. Outcomes were compared between groups of patients with stage II (high-stage localized) disease, stage III-IV (high-stage locally advanced) disease treated with chemotherapy, and stage III-IV disease not treated with chemotherapy. Among patients with high-stage locally advanced UTUC (stage III-IV), those who received adjuvant chemotherapy had significantly better rates of OS (67.1 vs. 33.7%; P=0.004), DFS (70.2 vs. 46.0%; P=0.030) and DMFS (86.3 vs. 65.2%; P=0.048) at 5-years compared with those who did not undergo adjuvant chemotherapy. However, there was no significant difference between the 5-year LRFS rates in these two groups (78.2 vs. 62.5%; P=0.525). Importantly, the survival curve of patients with high-stage UTUC who received adjuvant chemotherapy was similar to that of patients with low-stage UTUC who underwent surgery only. Multivariate analysis revealed that adjuvant chemotherapy was an independent risk factor for OS [without adjuvant chemotherapy vs. with adjuvant chemotherapy: Hazard ratio (HR), 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.129-0.654; P=0.003] and DFS (without adjuvant chemotherapy vs. with adjuvant chemotherapy: HR, 0.381; 95% CI, 0.168-0.865; P=0.021). In conclusion, adjuvant chemotherapy may improve the outcome for patients with high-stage locally advanced UTUC.

No abstract