Urethral Dilatation Compared with Cystoscopy Alone in the Treatment of Women with Recurrent Frequency and Dysuria

A. J. RUTHERFORD, K. HINSHAW, D. M. ESSENHIGH, D. E. NEAL

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations

Abstract

Summary— The relative merits of cystoscopy alone and cystoscopy plus urethral dilatation were compared in a randomised study of women with recurrent frequency and dysuria. One hundred women were studied before and at least 6 months after operation. A detailed questionnaire was completed, the severity of the symptoms was scored and patients underwent urodynamic investigation. Forty‐eight patients underwent cystoscopy alone and 52 underwent urethral dilatation. The two groups were well matched with regard to age, parity, menopausal status, previous gynaecological surgery and severity of symptoms. A significant improvement in symptoms was observed in both groups after treatment: 30% had no residual symptoms, 50% were improved and 20% were no better. However, no difference in final outcome was observed between those who had undergone cystoscopy alone and those who had undergone urethral dilatation. Furthermore, 7 patients who underwent urethral dilatation experienced transient stress incontinence of urine, a complication not observed in women who underwent cystoscopy alone. No benefit was observed from the addition of urethral dilatation to cystoscopy alone in women with recurrent frequency and dysuria.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)500-504
Number of pages5
JournalBritish Journal of Urology
Volume61
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1988
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Urethral Dilatation Compared with Cystoscopy Alone in the Treatment of Women with Recurrent Frequency and Dysuria'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this