Clinical relevance of urodynamic investigation tests prior to surgical correction of genital prolapse: a literature review

Urodynamic investigations have been advocated to be incorporated in the standard diagnostic workup of patients undergoing surgical correction of genital prolapse. Stress incontinence is reported by 40% of patients with genital prolapse. Urodynamic stress incontinence (USI) is diagnosed in 70–75% of these patients. Occult urodynamic stress incontinence (OUSI) is diagnosed in about 50% of the patients with genital prolapse not reporting stress incontinence before surgery. Performing urodynamic investigation in patients undergoing prolapse surgery may be valuable if diagnosing USI or OUSI results in the selection of the optimal treatment strategy. This treatment strategy is either a combination of prolapse and stress incontinence surgery or prolapse surgery at the beginning and re-evaluation of possible stress incontinence afterwards. The combination of prolapse and stress incontinence surgery has the advantage of attempting to solve two problems at the same moment, but carries an increased risk on unwanted side-effects, of which, voiding dysfunction and detrusor overactivity are the most important. This review presents a literature overview of what has been proven about the diagnostic and therapeutic value of urodynamic investigations in patients undergoing prolapse surgery.