In a recent issue of the Journal of Urology, Lowell Parsons, MD and Philip Hanno, MD offered opposing views about the PST. Here's an overview of what they think.
Many patients report discomfort and burning after administration of the PST. Please let us know about your experience.
|
|
C. Lowell Parsons, MD
Division of Uroloyg, University of California, San Diego |
Philip Hanno, MD
Division of Urology, University of Pennsylvania |
It is a quick, relatively painless test.
- About the same discomfort level as other urologic office procedures.
|
It does not accurately identify all persons with IC.
- Sometimes persons with IC can still have a negative PST.
|
It is more effective in identifying IC than the gold standard NIDDK criteria.
- NIDDK criteria fail to identify as many as 40% of persons with IC.
|
The PST cannot tell the difference between IC and some other disorders (such as overactive bladder).
- This could result in a false positive for IC (i.e. test scores indicate you have IC when you actually don’t)
|
| It can help doctors, especially gynecologists, identify unrecognized bladder problems as the source of pain. |
False negatives increase in people with associated disorders (such as overactive bladder, urinary tract infections, or non-bacterial prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome). |
| |
It may not assist doctors in developing a successful treatment plan.
- Not all people with a positive PST will react to drugs and other treatment techniques in the same way.
|
Source: J Urol. 2009;182:431-2, 434
Posted August 27, 2009