Visual assessment of urethrovesical junction mobility

The aim of the study was to compare visual assessment of anterior vaginal wall descent with the Q-tip test in evaluating urethrovesical junction mobility. One hundred and eleven patients with prolapse and/or urinary incontinence were examined in the supine lithotomy position with an empty bladder. Maximum straining Q-tip tests and maximum descent of the anterior vaginal wall were measured. Using each centimeter of descent as a cutoff value, the sensitivities, specificities and positive and negative predictive values were compared to those of the Q-tip test. As the cutt-off points were moved distally, specificity increased at the expense of sensitivity. There was no single cut-off point that provided adequate sensitivity and specificity to be clinically useful to replace the Q-tip test. It was concluded that visual assessment of anterior vaginal wall descent does not provide diagnostic accuracy and acceptable sensitivity and specificity to determine urethrovesical junction mobility. Other methods should be employed to assess support.Editorial Comment: Many clinicians claim that they can assess urethrovesical junction mobility visually and thus avoid employing other means, such as the Q-tip test, ultrasonography, bead-chain cystography or fluoroscopy. Montella et al. evaluate a technique of visual assessment of urethrovesical junction mobility based on the International Continence Society's Standardization of Terminology of Female Organ Prolapse and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction as compared to evaluation with the Q-tip test. Their results clearly indicate that this technique (measurement of the descent of point Aa) does not provide adequate sensitivity or specificity in determining urethrovesical junction descent compared to the Q-tip test. Although this technique was only compared to the Q-tip test and not all other modalities available, it is doubtful that visual assessment of anterior wall descent at any level would correspond to urethrovesical junction mobility, as is discussed very succinctly by the authors.