Urodynamics in a community-dwelling population of females 80 years or older. Which motive? Which diagnosis?

PURPOSE To determine why community-dwelling women aged 80 years or over were referred for urodynamic evaluation despite their advanced age and which urodynamic diagnosis was made. MATERIALS AND METHODS One hundred consecutive females (80-93 years) were referred to our urodynamics outpatient clinic for evaluation of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) between 2005 and 2008. Clinical evaluation comprised of a previous history of LUTS, previous medical history of neurological disease or dementia, pelvic floor dysfunction or prior pelvic surgery. Exclusion criteria were complete retention and severe dementia involving failure to understand simple instructions. Assessed items were results of uroflows (free flow and intubated flow), cystometry and urethral pressure profilometry, and final urodynamic diagnosis. RESULTS The main complaint evoked by the patients was incontinence (65.0%) of which 61.5% was "complicated" and urgency was reported by 70.0%. Interpretable free flow at arrival was very low (44.0%). Prevalence of detrusor overactivity was high, found in 45 patients of whom 16 had detrusor hyperactivity with impaired detrusor contractility. Detrusor overactivity and urgency were strongly associated (p = 0.004). Twenty-five patients had intrinsic sphincteric deficiency alone and 15 detrusor underactivity. CONCLUSION In this particular community-dwelling with an elderly female population, urodynamics is easily feasible. Incontinence, mainly "complicated" is the more frequent complaint and urgency the more frequent symptom. Urodynamic diagnosis underlines the high incidence of detrusor overactivity as well as impaired detrusor function.