ReviewInternational urogynecology journal2026
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bladder Wall Thickness for the Diagnosis of Detrusor Overactivity in Women.
Review in International urogynecology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionA systematic review with meta-analysis was carried out to study the hypothesis that bladder wall thickness measured by ultrasound is accurate at diagnosing detrusor overactivity in women.
methodThis meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO. A literature search was conducted using online databases Embase, Medline, and PubMed. Quality of articles was assessed, and articles were divided into groups to reduce heterogeneity for meta-analysis.
resultsA total of eight studies were selected for analysis. The mean bladder wall thickness in those "with detrusor overactivity" was found to be 5.234+/-1.424 and those "without detrusor overactivity" 4.356+/-1.124. Those "with detrusor overactivity" were found to have a mean increased bladder wall thickness of 0.879+/-0.958 (95% CI 0.143 to 1.615) when compared to those "without detrusor overactivity". Meta-analysis was performed with six of the eight studies to reduce heterogeneity of data. We found no overall effect and no significant difference in measurements taken in those "with detrusor overactivity" and those "without detrusor overactivity". Tests of heterogeneity demonstrate a moderate level of heterogeneity I
conclusionsMeta-analysis has demonstrated that measurement of bladder wall thickness using ultrasound cannot be used to diagnose detrusor overactivity and can therefore not replace urodynamics in the investigation of women with lower urinary tract symptoms. The results of this meta-analysis must be viewed with the understanding that studies included showed significant heterogeneity despite efforts to reduce large variation in data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41979647What 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.