Effectiveness of urotherapy and biofeedback treatment in dysfunctional voiding and factors affecting success
Journal of Pediatric Urology, cilt.21, sa.5, ss.1098-1104, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 21 Sayı: 5
- Basım Tarihi: 2025
- Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2025.06.006
- Dergi Adı: Journal of Pediatric Urology
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1098-1104
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Biofeedback, Child, Dysfunctional voiding, Urotherapy
- Hacettepe Üniversitesi Adresli: Hayır
Özet
Aim: Dysfunctional voiding is the persistence of the sphincter activity during voiding without anatomical or neuropathic causes and is an important cause of morbidity in children. In this study, we aimed to determine the results of urotherapy and biofeedback treatments and the factors affecting the results in the patients with dysfunctional voiding. Materials and methods: Patients who were diagnosed with dysfunctional voiding and received urotherapy and biofeedback treatments between July 2012 and March 2021, were included in the study. The patients' medical records were retrospectively reviewed. Complete and partial responses were defined as complete and partial improvement of the symptoms, respectively. Patients with a complete response were classified into one group, while patients with a partial response or no response were grouped into another. Nonparametric Mann–Whitney U test and Willcoxon test were used for continuous variables, chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test were used for discrete variables. The relationship was examined by multivariate and univariate logistic regression analysis. The results were evaluated with 95 % confidence interval and p < 0.05 significance level. IBM SPSS 20.0 was used for data analysis. Results: The study included 174 UT/BF cycles in 157 patients. Treatment success was complete response in 152 (87 %) cycles. Patient based treatment success was complete response in 139 (88.54 %) of 157 patients, and partial response or no response in 18 (11.46 %) patients. The effects of age, gender, reason for admission, UFM parameters, and PVR volume were not statistically significant. Discussion: The combination of standard urotherapy and biofeedback is widely used to treat patients with dysfunctional voiding. We evaluated the efficacy of these treatments and the factors affecting the results. Our study has limitations due to its retrospective design. Strengths of the study include a standardized approach with a single, experienced surgeon and long follow-up periods. The treatment of dysfunctional voiding is still debated in the literature, and randomized controlled trials with sufficient number of patients should be conducted to determine the most appropriate treatment approach. Conclusion: When analyzing patient characteristics, we found that age, gender, reason for admission, UFM parameters and PVR volume had no impact on treatment success, Therefore, UT/BF appears to be an appropriate first-line treatment in all these groups.