Introduction
Patients with nocturia have to face many hurdles before being diagnosed and treated properly. The aim of this paper is to: summarize the nocturia patient pathway, explore how nocturia is diagnosed and treated in the real world and use the Delphi method to develop a practical algorithm with a focus on what steps need to be taken before prescribing desmopressin.
Methods
Evidence comes from existing guidelines (Google, PubMed), International Consultation on Incontinence‐Research Society (ICI‐RS) 2017, prescribing information and a Delphi panel (3 rounds). The International Continence Society initiated this study, the authors represent the ICI‐RS, European Association of Urology, and Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction (SUFU).
Results
Diagnostic packages: consensus on, history taking for all causalities, intake diary (fluid, food) and bladder diary, not for its duration. Pelvic (women) or rectal (men) examination, prostate‐specific antigen, serum sodium check (SSC), renal function, endocrine screening: when judged necessary. Timing or empty stomach when SSC is not important. Therapeutic packages: the safe candidates for desmopressin can be phenotyped as no polydipsia, heart/kidney failure, severe leg edema or obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Lifestyle interventions may be useful. Initiating desmopressin: risk management consensus on three clinical pictures.
Follow‐up of desmopressin therapy: there was consensus on SSC day 3 to 7, and at 1 month. Stop therapy if SSC is <130 mmol/L regardless of symptoms. Stop if SSC is 130 to 135 mmol/L with symptoms of hyponatremia.
Conclusion
A summary of the nocturia patient pathway across different medical specialists is useful in the visualization and phenotyping of patients for diagnosis and therapy. By summarizing basic knowledge of desmopressin, we aim to ease its initiation and shorten the patient journey for nocturia.
Injected skeletal muscle progenitor cells incorporated into the injured sphincter complex resulted in long-term structural and functional restoration of the injured sphincter complex in this nonhuman primate model.
In this best practice document, we propose recommendations for the use of LASER for gynaecologic and urologic conditions such as vulvovaginal atrophy, urinary incontinence, vulvodynia and lichen sclerosus based on a thorough literature review. Most of the available studies are limited by their design; for example they lack a control group, patients are not randomized, follow up is short term, series are small, LASER is not compared with standard treatments, and most studies are industry sponsored. Due to these limitations, the level of evidence for the use of LASER in the treatment of these conditions remains low and does not allow for definitive recommendations for its use in routine clinical practice. Histological evidence is commonly reported as proof of tissue regeneration following LASER treatment. However, the histological changes noted can also be consistent with reparative changes after a thermal injury rather than necessarily representing regeneration or restoration of function. The use of LASER in women with vulvodynia or lichen sclerosus should not be recommended in routine clinical practice. There is no biological plausibility or safety data on its use on this population of women. The available clinical studies do not present convincing data regarding the efficacy of LASER for the treatment of vaginal atrophy or urinary incontinence. Also, while short-term complications seem to be uncommon, data concerning long-term outcomes are lacking. Therefore, at this point, LASER is not recommended for routine treatment of the aforementioned conditions unless part of well-designed clinical trials or with special arrangements for clinical governance, consent and audit.
Evidence of publication bias exists in abstracts presented at the 1999 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons annual meeting. Clinical decisions based on the literature may be biased due to an over-representation of studies with positive outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.