The Journal of Urology· 2015Q1
Diagnosis and Treatment of Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome: AUA Guideline Amendment
- 699citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2015year
Short summary
This amendment updates the AUA guideline for diagnosing and treating Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome (IC/BPS) by incorporating new literature published since 2011.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Guideline updated to reflect new research on IC/BPS diagnosis and treatment published after 2011.
- Diagnostic criteria for IC/BPS remain unchanged from the original 2011 guideline.
- New treatment information incorporated from 31 additional peer-reviewed articles.
- Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions used to supplement treatment information due to insufficient evidence in some areas.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this amendment is to provide an updated clinical framework for the diagnosis and treatment of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome based upon data received since the publication of original guideline in 2011. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review using the MEDLINE(®) database (search dates 1/1/83-7/22/09) was conducted to identify peer-reviewed publications relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of IC/BPS. This initial review yielded an evidence base of 86 treatment articles after application of inclusion/exclusion criteria. The AUA update literature review process, in which an additional systematic review is conducted periodically to maintain guideline currency with newly published relevant literature, was conducted in July 2013. This review identified an additional 31 articles, which were added to the evidence base of this Guideline. RESULTS: Newly incorporated literature describing the treatment of IC/BPS was integrated into the Guideline with additional treatment information provided as Clinical Principles and Expert Opinions when insufficient evidence existed. The diagnostic portion of the Guideline remains unchanged from the original publication and is still based on Expert Opinions and Clinical Principles. CONCLUSIONS: The management of IC/BPS continues to evolve as can be seen by an expanding literature on the topic. This document constitutes a clinical strategy and is not intended to be interpreted rigidly. The most effective approach for a particular patient is best determined by the individual clinician and patient. As the science relevant to IC/BPS evolves and improves, the strategies presented will require amendment to remain consistent with the highest standards of care.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. The Journal of Urology, 2015 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Urology
UrologyMedicine