Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

The relative merits of cystoscopy alone and cystoscopy plus urethral dilatation were compared in a randomised study of women with recurrent frequency and dysuria. One hundred women were studied before and at least 6 months after operation. A detailed questionnaire was completed, the severity of the symptoms was scored and patients underwent urodynamic investigation. Forty-eight patients underwent cystoscopy alone and 52 underwent urethral dilatation. The two groups were well matched with regard to age, parity, menopausal status, previous gynaecological surgery and severity of symptoms. A significant improvement in symptoms was observed in both groups after treatment: 30% had no residual symptoms, 50% were improved and 20% were no better. However, no difference in final outcome was observed between those who had undergone cystoscopy alone and those who had undergone urethral dilatation. Furthermore, 7 patients who underwent urethral dilatation experienced transient stress incontinence of urine, a complication not observed in women who underwent cystoscopy alone. No benefit was observed from the addition of urethral dilatation to cystoscopy alone in women with recurrent frequency and dysuria.


Journal article


Br J Urol

Publication Date





500 - 504


Adult, Cystoscopy, Dilatation, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Random Allocation, Recurrence, Urethra, Urination Disorders, Urodynamics