SynthesisBMC urology2025
Beyond urodynamics: non-invasive approaches to diagnosing detrusor underactivity in men with lower urinary tract symptoms - a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transperineal 3D vector magnetic resonance elastography of the prostate is feasible in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia and lower urinary tract symptoms.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Impact of Urodynamic Parameters on Treatment Decision-Making in Men Under 50 With Treatment-Resistant Chronic Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms.Neurourology and urodynamics · 2026Article
- Non-invasive prediction of detrusor underactivity in benign prostatic hyperplasia: an interpretable machine learning framework to optimize surgical selection.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- EasyVoid: A Handheld Coandă Effect Uroflowmeter for Accurate and Portable Measurement of Urinary Flow Dynamics.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate and synthesize existing evidence on non-invasive methods for diagnosing detrusor underactivity (DU) in men presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), focusing on their feasibility and diagnostic accuracy.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was conducted for original articles reporting on non-invasive diagnostic tests for DU in men with LUTS. Data extraction focuses on study characteristics, diagnostic methods, and accuracy. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.
resultsEighteen studies involving 7390 patients, of whom 3194 were diagnosed with DU, were included in our analysis. The evaluated diagnostic methods included ultrasound parameters, biomarkers, uroflowmetry results, symptom questionnaires, and clinical characteristics. Developed models, including those based on artificial intelligence (AI), and nomograms were also assessed. The symptom questionnaire DUA-SQ showed the highest sensitivity of 95.8%, while ultrasound measurements, such as detrusor wall thickness showed 100% specificity but limited sensitivity (42%). Models incorporating clinical variables achieved sensitivity rates of over 75%. Uroflowmetry parameters, particularly presence of "sawtooth" and "interrupted" waveforms, demonstrated sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 87%. Biomarkers, including serum adiponectin and urine NO/ATP ratio, achieved sensitivity of 79% and 88.5%, respectively. AI models showed potential, with sensitivities ranging from 65.9% to 79.7%. Due to the poor quality of the studies and data heterogeneity, meta-analysis was not performed.
conclusionsNon-invasive diagnostic methods for DU, particularly DUA-SQ, ultrasound measurements, and AI models, demonstrate potential, though their accuracies vary. Further research is needed to standardize these methods and enhance their diagnostic reliability.
trial registrationThe study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024556425). CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.