Urogenital Infections and Inflammations

T.E. Bjerklund Johansen, F. M.E. Wagenlehner, Y.-H. Cho, T. Matsumoto, J. N. Krieger, D. Shoskes, K. Naber

Bladder pain syndrome: differences in diagnostic strategies around the world

 Philip Hanno 1

1 University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States


Nomenclature for the syndrome commonly referred to as bladder pain syndrome is in flux. In the United States the disorder is interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome reflecting one entity. This reflects the need to keep the term interstitial cystitis for health insurance purposes. In Europe bladder pain syndrome is now the well-accepted nomenclature. In Asia, the situation in more complex. The terms frequency/urgency syndrome, hypersensitive bladder syndrome, painful bladder syndrome, and interstitial cystitis all carry different connotations and overlap to some extent.

A presumptive diagnosis requires a history compatible with the definition of symptoms, a physical examination, urinalysis, and exclusion of any confusable diseases. This is a major area of harmonization around the world. Further evaluation with cystoscopy and hydrodistention of the bladder is commonly done in Europe and Asia at the time of initial diagnosis, but is not considered mandatory.

To further harmonize nomenclature, diagnosis, and treatment algorithms and enable international clinical research to improve therapies, the International Consultation on Incontinence recently organized a meeting in Tokyo, hosted by the International Continence Society meeting Sept. 2016, and a further meeting, the International Consultation on Interstitial Cystitis Japan is planned in April 2018 in Kyoto.

Summary of recommendations and introduction

Bladder pain syndrome, formerly referred to as “interstitial cystitis” is now defined and diagnosed in such a way that it can no longer be considered a rare disease. It may affect up to 2.7% [1] of the adult female population and the prevalence in men may approach that in women, at least in the United States [2]. The last 25 years have seen a worldwide effort to try to standardize its nomenclature, definition, and diagnostic algorithm [3]. While there has been significant harmonization that facilitates clinical research and pharmacologic trials, there is still a way to go and significant differences in approach remain. In this section we shall discuss nomenclature, diagnosis, and treatment algorithms in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Concepts are rapidly changing and international meetings occur virtually every year which make this really a snapshot in time of a moving target. At this time harmonization has been reached on the understanding that no invasive diagnostic studies are necessary to begin empiric therapy anywhere in the world. However, common practices tend to vary with the least invasive approach in North America and most invasive in Asia at this time.


A systematic literature search was performed for the last 10 years in MEDLINE with the following key words: bladder pain syndrome, interstitial cystitis, diagnosis, guidelines. Guidelines on management of bladder pain syndrome from the United States, Europe, and Asia were reviewed along with manuscripts detailing diagnostic methodology and approach to the syndrome. Relevant manuscripts are sited in the bibliography. Conclusions on the common practices and degree of harmonization were then formulated.

United States

The idea of a comprehensive guideline for what was then termed “interstitial cystitis” was initially approached in 1997. The American Urological Association (AUA) conducted a major literature review and abstracted all pertinent publications and held several meetings devoted to the topic. It was determined there was not enough scholarly material extant to develop a set of guidelines and the issue lay dormant for 10 years. A follow-up review was then undertaken and a database of publications from 1983 through 2009 yielded the material that formed the basis for the report [4]. The systematic review revealed insufficient publications to address IC/BPS diagnosis and overall management from an evidence basis. The guideline in these areas is purely grounded on expert opinion and consensus obtained by a Delphi technique [5]. Treatment (not a part of this section) was addressed on the basis of 86 treatment articles that met the criteria for value and evidence.

The guideline defined IC/BPS as a single entity and based the definition on the definition of the Society for Urodynamics and Female Urology [6]. “An unpleasant sensation (pain, pressure, discomfort) perceived to be related to the urinary bladder, associated with lower urinary tract symptoms of more than six weeks duration, in the absence of infection or other identifiable causes.” The definition allows treatment to begin after a relatively short symptomatic period, minimizing the delay in initiation of treatment which could occur with definitions that require longer symptom durations (i.e. 6 months). Definitions used in research or clinical trial should be avoided in clinical practice; many patients may be misdiagnosed or have delays in diagnosis and treatment if these criteria are used [7].

The prototypical IC/BPS patient may also present with urinary urgency and frequency, but these symptoms alone do not distinguish the IC/BPS patient from other lower urinary tract disorders. They must exist in conjunction with pain, pressure, or discomfort for the diagnosis to be entertained in the United States. The guideline goes on to state that the urgency experienced in the IC/BPS syndrome is more likely a function of pain than the fear of incontinence that is the hallmark of frequency from overactive bladder [8], [9].

Chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CP/CPPS) in men (NIH type 3 nonbacterial prostatitis) can be difficult to differentiate from IC/BPS. It is characterized by pain in the perineum, suprapubic region, testicles or tip of the penis. The pain is often exacerbated by urination or ejaculation. While voiding symptoms such as sense of incomplete bladder emptying and urinary frequency are also commonly reported, pain is the primary defining characteristic of CP/CPPS. The AUA guideline notes that the diagnosis of IC/BPS should be strongly considered in men with pain, pressure or discomfort perceived to be related to the bladder when associated with frequency, nocturia, or urgent desire to void. The definition does not change for men, and indeed when applied it shows similar prevalence in men and women [2].

Insufficient literature was identified to constitute an evidence base for diagnosis of IC/BPS in clinical practice. The guideline recommends the following:

  1. The basic assessment should include a careful history, physical examination and laboratory examination to document symptoms and signs that characterize IC/BPS and exclude other disorders commonly associated with IC/BPS in the differential. This includes urinalysis, urine culture, standard evaluation with imaging and endoscopy for unevaluated microhematuria, and urinary cytology in those with risk of bladder cancer. The potassium sensitivity test [10] is NOT recommended because of poor specificity and sensitivity and the pain associated with the procedure [11].
  2. Baseline voiding symptoms and pain levels should be obtained in order to measure subsequent treatment effects.
  3. Cystoscopy and/or urodynamics should be considered when the diagnosis is in doubt: these tests are NOT necessary for making the diagnosis in uncomplicated presentations.  The only consistent cystoscopic finding that leads to a diagnosis of IC/BPS is that of one or more inflammatory appearing lesions as initially described by Hunner [12]. Years before Wennevik’s landmark paper, the American guideline dismissed the significance of the presence or absence of glomerulations on endoscopy [13].

In a follow-up amendment to the guideline published in 2015 and incorporating literature through July 2013, there was nothing in the literature to call forth a change in any of the statements related to diagnosis [14].

The definition, diagnosis, and treatment algorithm of the American Urological Association is reproduced as figure 1.

Figure 1: Guideline of the American Urological Association [14]


In Europe, the International Association for the Study of Bladder Pain Syndrome (ESSIC), initially a European group of experts from around the continent, has been extremely influential in formulating the definition, classification, and diagnostic strategies for this symptom complex. The group was formed by its first president, Jørgen Nordling [15], after the need for such a consensus building organization was demonstrated by the many different interpretations of bladder pain syndrome at a major international meeting in March 2003 sponsored by Dr. Tomohiro Ueda in Kyoto with expert opinions from 5 continents represented [16].

ESSIC proposed to give the syndrome, previously referred to as interstitial cystitis or painful bladder syndrome [17], a new name that would better fit into existing pain taxonomy [18]. This would also allow enable a unique definition, and thus minimize confusion. Bladder pain syndrome (BPS) was defined on the basis of chronic pelvic pain, pressure or discomfort perceived to be related to the urinary bladder accompanied by at least one other urinary symptom, like persistent urge to void or urinary frequency. Confusable diseases as the cause of the symptoms must be excluded. Further documentation and classification of BPS might be performed according to findings at cystoscopy with hydrodistention and the morphological findings from bladder biopsy. The presence of other organ symptoms as well as cognitive, behavioural, emotional and sexual symptoms should be addressed.

The ESSIC definition is based solely on symptoms. A six-month duration of symptoms was chosen for diagnosis, thus indicating that the condition had become chronic and would be unlikely to spontaneously resolve. A long list of confusable diseases and techniques to rule them out with appropriate testing is suggested, but it is left up to the provider to determine which confusable diseases are likely enough in a given patient to warrant further investigation. The jewel of the ESSIC approach is the classification system based on whether or not an endoscopic examination was performed and if so, whether tissue for pathological examination was obtained (figure 2). The presence or absence of endoscopy, glomerulations, and Hunner lesion provide for 8 categories, enabling patients with the syndrome to be studied within their cohorts to gather epidemiologic and treatment data. Patient in the 3X, 3B and 3C categories comprise the classic phenotype with Hunner lesions. Recent data indicating the lack of specificity, sensitivity, and prognostic values of glomerulations, nicely summarized by Wennevik, suggest that category 2 may be eliminated in future iterations of classification [13].

Figure 2: Diagnosis and Classification according to the International Association for the Study of Bladder Pain Syndrome [19]

While the European Association of Urology closely follows the ESSIC, their definition of BPS as published in the guideline hews more closely to that of the International Continence Society: “Suprapubic pain is related to bladder filling accompanied by other symptoms such as increased daytime and nighttime frequency.” [20] “No proven urinary infection or other obvious pathology.” [20] This specification that the pain should be suprapubic and related to filling has been shown to result in decreasing the sensitivity by 34% [21]. Nevertheless, the European Association of Urology makes a strong case for integrating the medical, psychosocial, and sexual elements of care to engage the patient in a collaborative journey towards self-management [22].

Although firm data is lacking, the tendency in Europe seems to be to routinely evaluate the vast majority of patients with cystoscopy under anesthesia [23], [24], [25]. Various studies in Europe show the prevalence of Hunner lesions to be from 8% up to 55%, perhaps explaining the propensity for endoscopic evaluation [26], [27], [24].

Japan, Korea, Taiwan

The nomenclature and diagnosis of bladder pain syndrome is somewhat more complicated and opaque than the more distilled American and European concepts. The first attempts at harmonization were the result of the International Consultation on Interstitial Cystitis Japan 13 years ago [28]. A second meeting culminated with the development of Asian guidelines [29] and a follow-up meeting was devoted to the process of harmonization [30]. A fourth world-wide meeting is scheduled in 2018.

The current Asian thinking on what is referred to as bladder pain syndrome in the rest of the world was crystalized by Homma in a paper devoted to terminology [31]. The Japanese and Asian guidelines are basically identical [29], [32] and define interstitial cystitis as a disease of the urinary bladder diagnosed by three conditions: lower urinary tract symptoms, bladder pathology (such as Hunner lesion and mucosal bleeding after over distention) and exclusions of confusable diseases. There is no requirement for pain. The characteristic symptom complex is terms as hypersensitive bladder syndrome (HBS). HBS is defined as a bladder hypersensitivity, usually associated with urinary frequency, WITH OR WITHOUT bladder pain.

Thus, HBS would be a clinical entity that is more inclusive than pain syndromes. It incorporates patients complaining and not complaining of pain. HBS is a descriptive term that is appropriate for patients with symptoms of interstitial cystitis who do not fulfill the endoscopic findings of interstitial cystitis. Painful bladder syndrome (PBS) is HSB with pain. One can see the Asian thinking with regard to the relationships of these entities in figure 3. The general term “urgency frequency syndrome” also would include overactive bladder: urinary urgency, usually associated with urinary frequency, with or without urgency incontinence, the definition of the international continence society [17].

Figure 3: Asian conception of nomenclature (see text) [31]
HSB = hypersensitive bladder syndrome
PBS = painful bladder syndrome
OAB = overactive bladder

Thus, in Asia the term bladder pain syndrome does not have a specific meaning. It is essential to do an endoscopic evaluation to diagnosis interstitial cystitis, but if the provider chooses not to do so, the diagnosis would either be HSB or PBS depending upon whether the patient had urinary symptoms with pain or without pain. One can see that it would be relatively easy to confuse overactive bladder with HSB in this schema and thus make pharmaceutical study reports somewhat problematic.

In Asia one can make a diagnosis of presumed interstitial cystitis on the basis of history, physical examination, and urinalysis alone and begin empiric therapy. In that sense, the American, European, and Asian concepts seem to merge. The Asian diagnostic/management algorithm is displayed in figure 4.

Figure 4: Diagnosis and Management Algorithm Japan, Taiwan, Korea [29]

A recent survey on clinical practice of interstitial cystitis in Japan surveyed the number of IC patients, cystoscopic findings, diagnostic methods, and treatment modalities in 114 medical institutions [33]. The prevalence estimate was 3.56 per 100,000, very low but in line with other estimates when survey of providers was the methodology [34]. Of course this reflects patients requiring more intensive care overall. Ninety percent or more of patients underwent endoscopic evaluation and the overall prevalence of Hunner lesions was 29% and this finding was skewed depending upon the institution. Eighty-three percent of patients met the Asian definition of interstitial cystitis, 10% hypersensitive bladder syndrome, and 7% unknown. Evaluation included endoscopy, symptom and quality of life assessment, frequency-volume chart, urinalysis, urine cytology, urine culture, post void residual determination, uroflowmetry, and ultrasound.

In China, prevalence surveys have used the O’Leary Sant questionnaire as criteria [35]. Potassium sensitivity testing and hydrodistention are commonly employed [36]. Clinical history and urodynamics are also important parts of the diagnosis [37]. Complementary and alternative medicine, as an optional treatment, has been widely used [38]. In India retroperitoneal ultrasonography, measurement of post void residual, and cystoscopy with hydrodistention form the core for diagnosis [39].

International consultation

At this time there is no overwhelming international consensus on how to diagnose or manage bladder pain syndrome, and while Europe and North America agree on nomenclature, the Asian guideline differs. The International Consultation with members from Europe, North America, and Asia meets every 4 years to try to reach a consensus. Their diagnostic and treatment algorithm is presented in figure 5 [40]. The most significant harmonization to occur internationally is that all patients can be treated empirically on the basis of history, physical examination, urine culture, and elimination of likely confusable diseases without the need for invasive treatment at the onset of medical consultation.

Figure 5: Diagnosis and Management Algorithm of International Consultation on Incontinence [40]


[1] Berry SH, Elliott MN, Suttorp M, Bogart LM, Stoto MA, Eggers P, Nyberg L, Clemens JQ. Prevalence of symptoms of bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis among adult females in the United States. J Urol. 2011 Aug;186(2):540-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.132
[2] Suskind AM, Berry SH, Ewing BA, Elliott MN, Suttorp MJ, Clemens JQ. The prevalence and overlap of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome in men: results of the RAND Interstitial Cystitis Epidemiology male study. J Urol. 2013 Jan;189(1):141-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.088
[3] Nordling J, Fall M, Hanno P. Global concepts of bladder pain syndrome (interstitial cystitis). World J Urol. 2012 Aug;30(4):457-64. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-011-0785-x
[4] Hanno PM, Burks DA, Clemens JQ, Dmochowski RR, Erickson D, Fitzgerald MP, Forrest JB, Gordon B, Gray M, Mayer RD, Newman D, Nyberg L Jr, Payne CK, Wesselmann U, Faraday MM; Interstitial Cystitis Guidelines Panel of the American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. AUA guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome. J Urol. 2011 Jun;185(6):2162-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2011.03.064
[5] Waggoner J, Carline JD, Durning SJ. Is There a Consensus on Consensus Methodology? Descriptions and Recommendations for Future Consensus Research. Acad Med. 2016 May;91(5):663-8. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001092
[6] Hanno P, Dmochowski R. Status of international consensus on interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome/painful bladder syndrome: 2008 snapshot. Neurourol Urodyn. 2009;28(4):274-86. DOI: 10.1002/nau.20687
[7] Hanno PM, Landis JR, Matthews-Cook Y, Kusek J, Nyberg L Jr. The diagnosis of interstitial cystitis revisited: lessons learned from the National Institutes of Health Interstitial Cystitis Database study. J Urol. 1999 Feb;161(2):553-7.
[8] Diggs C, Meyer WA, Langenberg P, Greenberg P, Horne L, Warren JW. Assessing urgency in interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome. Urology. 2007 Feb;69(2):210-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.09.053
[9] Hanno PM, Chapple CR, Cardozo LD. Bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis: a sense of urgency. World J Urol. 2009 Dec;27(6):717-21. DOI: 10.1007/s00345-009-0439-4
[10] Parsons CL. Potassium sensitivity test. Tech Urol. 1996;2(3):171-3.
[11] Hanno P. Potassium sensitivity test for painful bladder syndrome/interstitial cystitis: con. J Urol. 2009 Aug;182(2):431-2, 434. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2009.05.070
[12] Hunner GL. A rare type of bladder ulcer in women; report of cases. Boston Med Surg Journal. 1915 May 6;172:660–4. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM191505061721802
[13] Wennevik GE, Meijlink JM, Hanno P, Nordling J. The Role of Glomerulations in Bladder Pain Syndrome: A Review. J Urol. 2016 Jan;195(1):19-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.06.112
[14] Hanno PM, Erickson D, Moldwin R, Faraday MM; American Urological Association. Diagnosis and treatment of interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome: AUA guideline amendment. J Urol. 2015 May;193(5):1545-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.01.086
[15] Nordling J, Anjum FH, Bade JJ, Bouchelouche K, Bouchelouche P, Cervigni M, Elneil S, Fall M, Hald T, Hanus T, Hedlund H, Hohlbrugger G, Horn T, Larsen S, Leppilahti M, Mortensen S, Nagendra M, Oliveira PD, Osborne J, Riedl C, Sairanen J, Tinzl M, Wyndaele JJ. Primary evaluation of patients suspected of having interstitial cystitis (IC). Eur Urol. 2004 May;45(5):662-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2003.11.021
[16] Ueda T. The legendary beginning of the International Consultation on Interstitial Cystitis. Int J Urol. 2003 Oct;10 Suppl:S1-2.
[17] Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, van Kerrebroeck P, Victor A, Wein A; Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21(2):167-78.
[18] Baranowksi AP, Abrams P, Berger RE, Buffington CAT, de C. Williams AC, Hanno P, Loeser JD, Nickel CJ, Wesselmann U. Urogenital Pain – Time to Accept a New Approach to Phenotyping and, as a Consequence, Management. Eur Urol. 2008 Jan;53(1):33-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.10.010
[19] van de Merwe JP, Nordling J, Bouchelouche P, Bouchelouche K, Cervigni M, Daha LK, Elneil S, Fall M, Hohlbrugger G, Irwin P, Mortensen S, van Ophoven A, Osborne JL, Peeker R, Richter B, Riedl C, Sairanen J, Tinzl M, Wyndaele JJ. Diagnostic criteria, classification, and nomenclature for painful bladder syndrome/interstitial cystitis: an ESSIC proposal. Eur Urol. 2008 Jan;53(1):60-7.
[20] Fall M, Baranowski AP, Elneil S, Engeler D, Hughes J, Messelink EJ, Oberpenning F, de C Williams AC; European Association of Urology. EAU guidelines on chronic pelvic pain. Eur Urol. 2010 Jan;57(1):35-48. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.08.020
[21] Warren JW, Meyer WA, Greenberg P, Horne L, Diggs C, Tracy JK. Using the International Continence Society's definition of painful bladder syndrome. Urology. 2006 Jun;67(6):1138-42; discussion 1142-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.01.086
[22] Engeler DS, Baranowski AP, Dinis-Oliveira P, Elneil S, Hughes J, Messelink EJ, van Ophoven A, Williams AC; European Association of Urology. The 2013 EAU guidelines on chronic pelvic pain: is management of chronic pelvic pain a habit, a philosophy, or a science? 10 years of development. Eur Urol. 2013 Sep;64(3):431-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.04.035
[23] Wyndaele JJ, Van Dyck J, Toussaint N. Cystoscopy and bladder biopsies in patients with bladder pain syndrome carried out following ESSIC guidelines. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2009;43(6):471-5. DOI: 10.3109/00365590903199007
[24] Richter B, Hesse U, Hansen AB, Horn T, Mortensen SO, Nordling J. Bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis in a Danish population: a study using the 2008 criteria of the European Society for the Study of Interstitial Cystitis. BJU Int. 2010 Mar;105(5):660-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08847.x
[25] Rourke W, Khan SA, Ahmed K, Masood S, Dasgupta P, Khan MS. Painful bladder syndrome/interstitial cystitis: aetiology, evaluation and management. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2014 Jun 30;86(2):126-31. DOI: 10.4081/aiua.2014.2.126
[26] Rais-Bahrami S, Friedlander JI, Herati AS, Sadek MA, Ruzimovsky M, Moldwin RM. Symptom profile variability of interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome by age. BJU Int. 2012 May;109(9):1356-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10481.x
[27] Logadottir Y, Fall M, Kåbjörn-Gustafsson C, Peeker R. Clinical characteristics differ considerably between phenotypes of bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2012 Oct;46(5):365-70. DOI: 10.3109/00365599.2012.689008
[28] Ueda T, Sant GR, Hanno PM, Yoshimura N. Interstitial cystitis and frequency-urgency syndrome (OAB syndrome). Int J Urol. 2003 Oct;10 Suppl:S39-48.
[29] Homma Y, Ueda T, Tomoe H, Lin AT, Kuo HC, Lee MH, Lee JG, Kim DY, Lee KS; Interstitial cystitis guideline committee. Clinical guidelines for interstitial cystitis and hypersensitive bladder syndrome. Int J Urol. 2009 Jul;16(7):597-615. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2009.02326.x
[30] Ueda T, Hanno P, Nordling J, Yoshimura N. The 3rd International Consultation on Interstitial Cystitis, Japan 2013. Int J Urol. 2014;21:1–2. DOI: 10.1111/iju.12306
[31] Homma Y. Lower urinary tract symptomatology: Its definition and confusion. Int J Urol. 2008 Jan;15(1):35-43. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2007.01907.x
[32] Homma Y, Ueda T, Ito T, Takei M, Tomoe H. Japanese guideline for diagnosis and treatment of interstitial cystitis. Int J Urol. 2009 Jan;16(1):4-16. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02208.x
[33] Yamada Y, Nomiya A, Niimi A, Igawa Y, Ito T, Tomoe H, Takei M, Ueda T, Homma Y. A survey on clinical practice of interstitial cystitis in Japan. Transl Androl Urol. 2015 Oct;4(5):486-90. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.08.06
[34] Hanno P, Dinis P, Lin A, Nickel C, Nordling J, van Ophoven A, Ueda T. Bladder Pain Syndrome. In: Abrams P, Cardozo L, Khoury S, Wein A, editors. Incontinence. 5th ed. Paris: ICUD-EAU; 2013. p. 1583–649. Available from: http://www.icud.info/PDFs/INCONTINENCE%202013.pdf
[35] Li GZ, Zhang N, Du P, Yang Y, Wu SL, Xiao YX, Jin R, Liu L, Shen H, Dai Y. Risk factors for interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms: a Chinese multi-center study. Chin Med J (Engl). 2010 Oct;123(20):2842-6.
[36] Sun ZQ, Qian WQ, Xie DS, Song JD. [The study of diagnosis and treatment of interstitial cystitis]. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2005 May;43(10):659-61.
[37] Flores-Carreras O, González-Ruiz MI, Martínez-Espinoza CJ, Monroy-Rodríguez F, Zaragoza-Torres RM. Interstitial cystitis/painful bladder syndrome: diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic response in a private urogynecology unit. Transl Androl Urol. 2015 Dec;4(6):620-3. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.10.11
[38] Pang R, Ali A. The Chinese approach to complementary and alternative medicine treatment for interstitial cystitis/bladder pain syndrome. Transl Androl Urol. 2015 Dec;4(6):653-61. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.08.10
[39] Mishra NN. Clinical presentation and treatment of bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis (BPS/IC) in India. Transl Androl Urol. 2015 Oct;4(5):512-23. DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4683.2015.10.05
[40] Hanno PM, Cervigni M, Dinis P, Lin A, Nickel JC, Nordling J, van Ophoven A, Ueda T. Bladder pain syndrome. In: Abrams P, Cardoza L, Wagg A, Wein A, editors. Incontience. 6th ed. Paris: ICUD-EAU; 2017. p. 2203-2302.

The ZB MED – Information Center for Life Sciences, Germany, together with the European Association of Urology (EAU) provided the opportunity to publish a “Living Textbook” on “Urogenital Infections and Inflammations” in an open access form. This “Living Textbook” represents also an update of the Textbook on Urogenital Infections published 2010 by the International Consultation on Urological Infections and the EAU: http://www.icud.info/urogenitalinfections.html.

The “Living Textbook” will cover infections and inflammations of the kidney, the urinary tract, as well as the male and female genital tract considering pathogenesis, diagnostics, treatment, prophylaxis and future aspects. The “Living Textbook” will be structured into about 26 Sections each with two section co-chairs responsible for peer review of the chapters of each section. Each chapter should reflect the background to the topic and highlight all of the critical evidence relating to the subject. The intention is to provide an up to date, concise synthesis of the literature on that topic, and for clinical topics also recommendations based on levels of evidence for contemporary clinical practice, as well as suggested research recommendations.

The editors hope that this “Living Textbook” may become a useful instrument for physicians of different specialties taking care about patients suffering from these diseases.

Truls E. Bjerklund Johansen (Norway),

Florian ME Wagenlehner (Germany),

Yong-Hyun Cho (South Korea),

Tetsuro Matsumoto (Japan),

John N Krieger (USA),

Daniel Shoskes (USA),

Kurt G. Naber (Germany).

Publishing at PUBLISSO

Your chapter will be published at the PUBLISSO platform (https://books.publisso.de).

Information for corresponding authors

It is necessary for all corresponding authors to register at PUBLISSO.
To register at PUBLISSO please click the following link: http://books.publisso.de/publisso_gold/register

After registration, please complete your user profile. Information from your user profile will appear in the published chapter and the authors board of the book (http://books.publisso.de/publisso_gold/book/52). If you are displayed in the authors board, you can be contacted by readers and other professionals. You can also contact other authors of the book for exchange and to build a network.
(If you do not want to be displayed in the authors board, but stay registered, you can disable this feature in your profile settings. In this case, your affiliation (publication data) will be displayed in the published chapter only.)

We kindly ask you to provide the co-authors email addresses in the manuscript so that we can contact them in case of queries.

Information for co-authors

After publication of your chapter, your affiliation (publication data) will be displayed in the published chapter.

If you also want to be displayed in the authors board of the book (http://books.publisso.de/publisso_gold/book/52), we kindly ask you to register at PUBLISSO. If you are displayed in the authors board, you can be contacted by readers and other professionals. You can also contact other authors of the book for exchange and to build a network.

To register at PUBLISSO please click the following link: http://books.publisso.de/publisso_gold/register

If you do not want to be displayed in the authors board of the book, you do not have to register. Your affiliation (publication data) will be displayed in the published chapter only.


If you have any further questions please don’t hesitate to contact the PUBLISSO editorial office:

E-Mail: livingbooks@zbmed.de
Phone: +49 221 478-7093


The textbook will be structured in sections with two co-chairs each. Each section will start with an introductory chapter written by the two respective co-chairs presented like an editorial commentary in regard to the following chapters (see proposed contents of the book). The two co-chairs of each section will also peer review all chapters in their section and stimulate a consensus discussion within their section together with the authors and the main editors if needed.


Each chapter should reflect the background to the topic and highlight all of the critical evidence relating to the subject. The intention is to provide an up to date, concise synthesis of the literature on that topic, and for clinical topics also recommendations based on levels of evidence for contemporary clinical practice, as well as suggested research recommendations.


Each manuscript should have up to approximately 3,000 words (excluding abstract, tables/figures and references). The abstract should count about 300 words.


The outline of each chapter should be structured as follows (similar as in the edition 2010, which can be downloaded for free: http://www.icud.info/urogenitalinfections.html):

  1. Abstract
  2. Summary of recommendations*/key notes*
    (*which ever term is more appropriate)
  3. Introduction
  4. Methods
  5. Results
  6. Further research
  7. Conclusions
  8. Acknowledgement
  9. Conflict of interest of each author
  10. References

Citation style

As a citation style, the Vancouver style is preferred.

Please mark your references in the text with square brackets ([1], [2], ...).

Summary of recommendations

We would like to have the Summary of recommendations at the beginning after the abstract (as in the edition 2010). However, we do not expect as in the edition 2010, that each recommendation is also specified according to Level of Evidence and Grade of Recommendation, because such a claim would not only need a systematic literature search (see below), but also a structured discussion in a defined group of experts.

Systematic literature search

A systematic literature search should be performed, at least of PUBMED/MEDLINE but ideally of several relevant databases in addition (like Cochrane CENTRAL) to find recent, high quality systematic reviews and/or primary research studies. It is not expected to perform for all chapters a de novo systematic review, if such reviews are already published recently, but it still may be indicated for some items. For questions relating therapy, it should be focused on evidence from (systematic reviews of) randomized controlled trials if available.

The method of the systematic literature search needs to be fully described in the section “Methods”, e.g.:

“A systematic literature search was performed for the last ... (usually 10) years in MEDLINE, Cochrane etc. with the following key words ... and the following limitations: e.g. UTI, age (adult?), ... clinical studies ... English ... abstract available ... only peer reviewed ...

A total of ... publications were identified, which were screened by title and abstract ... After exclusion of duplicates ... a total of ... were included into the review (analysis), supplemented by citations or known to the authors ... ”.

Clinical topics

Clinical topics should be focused on the importance to clinical practice according to the up to date scientific knowledge as presented in the literature. It should relate to questions/complaints/symptoms of patient/population concerning definition, diagnosis, therapy/prevention, intervention, and outcome in comparison, if different approaches are feasible. Please choose patient-important outcomes and focus on those, which you deem critical for decision-making.

Level of evidence and grade of recommendations

Any recommendation should be based on the level of evidence and the grade of recommendation. For this purpose the following system, modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine should be used (EAU guidelines 2015):

Level of evidence (LE)

Level Type of evidence
1a Evidence obtained from meta-analysis of randomised trials
1b Evidence obtained from at least one randomised trial
2a Evidence obtained from one well-designed controlled study without randomization
2b Evidence obtained from at least one other type of well-designed quasi-experimental study
3 Evidence obtained from well-designed non-experimental studies, such as comparative studies, correlation studies and case reports.
4 Evidence obtained from expert committee reports or opinions or clinical experience of respected authorities.

Grade of Recommendations (GoR)

Grade Nature of recommendations
A Based on clinical studies of good quality and consistency addressing the specific recommendations and including at least one randomised trial
B Based on well-conducted clinical studies, but without randomised clinical trials
C Made despite the absence of directly applicable clinical studies of good quality

Comments (EAU guidelines 2015)

The aim of assigning a LE and grading recommendations is to provide transparency between the underlying evidence and the recommendation given.

It should be noted that when recommendations are graded, the link between the level of evidence and grade of recommendation is not directly linear. Availability of randomized controlled trials may not necessarily translate into a grade “A” recommendation where there are methodological limitations or disparity in published results.

Alternatively, absence of high level evidence does not necessarily preclude a grade A recommendation, if there is overwhelming clinical experience and consensus. In addition, there may be exceptional situations where corroborating studies cannot be performed, perhaps for ethical or other reasons and in this case unequivocal recommendations are considered helpful for the reader. The quality of the underlying scientific evidence - although a very important factor – has to be balanced against benefits and burdens, values and preferences and costs when a grade is assigned.

Since the same rating system should be used in all chapters, for the sake of brevity the same sentence could be used in “Methods” for all manuscripts, because the rating system will be described in details in the Preface of the book:

“The studies were rated according to the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations graded according to a system used in the EAU guidelines modified from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine [1].”


[1] European Association of Urology. Guidelines. Methodology section. 2015 ed. Arnhem: European Association of Urology; 2015. p. 3. ISBN/EAN: 978-90-79754-80-9. Available from: http://uroweb.org/wp-content/uploads/EAU-Extended-Guidelines-2015-Edn..pdf

The Living Handbook of Urogenital Infections and Inflammations is issued by:

European Association of Urology
att. Maurice Schlief, EAU executive manager business affairs

P.O.Box 30016
NL-6803 AA Arnhem, The Netherlands

Phone: 0031-26-38.90.680
E-mail: m.schlief@uroweb.org

Editor in Chief

responsible for the contents according to § 5 TMG and § 55 Abs. 2 RStV (Germany):

Kurt G. Naber, MD, PhD
Assoc. Professor of Urology

Technical University of Munich
Karl-Bickleder-Str. 44c
94315 Straubing, Germany

E-mail: kurt.naber@nabers.de

John N. Krieger MD, PhD

University of Washington Section of Urology


Daniel Shoskes MD, PhD

Cleveland Clinic Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute


Yong-Hyun Cho MD, PhD

St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea Department of Urology


Tetsuro Matsumoto MD, PhD

University of Occupational and Environmental Health Department of Urology


Florian M. E. Wagenlehner MD, PhD

Justus-Liebig University of Giessen Clinic of Urology and Andrology


Truls Erik Bjerklund Johansen MD, PhD

Oslo University Hospital Urology Department


Kurt G. Naber MD, PhD

Technical University of Munich


Punit Bansal MD, PhD

R G Stone and Super Specialty Hospital
Department of Urology


Riccardo Bartoletti

University of Pisa
Department of Translational Research and New Technologies


Truls Erik Bjerklund Johansen MD, PhD

Oslo University Hospital
Urology Department


PD Dr. med. Gernot Bonkat

University Basel
alta uro AG, Merian Iselin Klinik, Center of Biomechanics & Calorimetry (COB)


Prof. Tommaso Cai MD

Santa Chiara Regional Hospital
Dept. of Urology


Dr Leyland Chuang

Ng Teng Fong Hospital, National University Health System
Department of Medicine


Prof. Milan Cizman

University Medical Centre
Department of Infectious Diseases


Alison Crawford MSc

Queen's University
Department of Psychology


Pfofessor Svetlana Dubrovina MD, PhD

Rostov Medical State University
Obstetrics and Gynaecology


Dr Valerie Huei Li Gan MBBS (S'pore), MRCS (Edin), MMed (Surg), FAMS (Urology)

Singapore General Hospital
Department of Urology


Philip Hanno

University of Pennsylvania


Ass prof MD Gundela Holmdahl

Queen Silvia Childrens Hospital, Sahlgrens Academy
Pediatric surgery and urology


Udo B. Hoyme

HELIOS Hospital Erfurt Ltd.
Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics


David Hunstad

Washington University School of Medicine
Pediatrics / Molecular Microbiology


Gitte M. Hvistendahl

Aarhus University Hospital


Prof. Michael KOGAN M.D., PhD

Rostov State Medical University
Department of Urology


Dr Akihiro Kanematsu

Hyogo College of Medicine
Department of Urology


Frieder Keller

University Hospital Ulm
Department Internal Medicine 1, Nephrology


Professor Katarzyna Kilis-Pstrusinska PhD, MD

Wroclaw Medical University
Department of Pediatric Nephrology


MD, PhD Tae-Hyoung Kim

Chung-Ang University


John N. Krieger MD, PhD

University of Washington
Section of Urology


Prof Ekaterina Kulchavenya

Novosibirsk Research TB Institute, Novosibirsk State Medical University


Dr Christina Kåbjörn Gustafsson

Ryhov Hospital Jönköping


Dr. Bela Köves

South Pest Teaching Hospital
Department of Urology


Dr. med. Giuseppe Magistro

Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich
Department of Urology


Vittorio Magri

Urologic Clinic


András Magyar

South-Pest Hospital
Department of Urology


Professor Emeritus Brian Morris

University of Sydney
School of Medical Sciences


Baerbel Muendner-Hensen

ICA-Deutschland e.V.


Stephen F. Murphy

Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University
Department of Urology


Kurt G. Naber MD, PhD

Technical University of Munich


Prof. Yulia Naboka

Rostov State Medical University
Department of Microbiology


Dr. J. Curtis Nickel MD

Queen's University
Department of Urology


Professor Ralph Peeker MD PhD

University of Gothenburg
Department of Urology


Tamara Perepanova

N.A. Lopatkin Research Institute of Urology and Interventional Radiology


Prof. Gianpaolo Perletti M. Clin. Pharmacol.

University of Insubria
Department of Biotechnology and Life Sciences


Felice Petraglia

Department of Biomedical, Experimental and Clinical Sciences, University of Florence
Obstetrics and Gynecology


Michel Pontari

Temple University School of Medicine
Department of Urology


Dr. Jörgen Quaghebeur PhD. Med. Sci.

University Hospital Antwerp and University Antwerp
Department of Urology


Yazan F. Rawashdeh

Aarhus University Hospital
Paediatric Urology Section, Department of Urology


Professor Claus Riedl MD



Matthew Roberts

The University of Queensland
Faculty of Medicine


PD Dr. med Guido Schmiemann MPH

Institut für Public Health und Pflegeforschung, Universität Bremen
Abteilung Versorgungsforschung


Caroline Schneeberger MD PhD

Academic Medical Center (AMC)


Prof. Dr. med. Peter Schneede

Klinikum Memmingen
Department of Urology


Aaron C. Shoskes

Des Moines University Medical College of Ostheopathic Medicine


Daniel Shoskes MD, PhD

Cleveland Clinic
Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute


Prof. Dr. Roswitha Siener

University of Bonn
University Stone Centre, Department of Urology


Sofia Sjöström

Queen Silvia Childrens Hospital, Sahlgrens Academy
Pediatric surgery and urology


Mathew Sorensen

University of Washington School of Medicine
Department of Urology


Prof. Dr. Dr. Walter Ludwig Strohmaier FEBU

Regiomed-Klinikum Coburg. Medical School Regiomed
Urology and Paediatric Urology


Satoshi Takahashi

Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine
Department of Infection Control and Laboratory Medicine


Professor Paul Anantharajah Tambyah

Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University Hospital
Department of Medicine


Peter Tenke

Jahn Ferenc South Pest Teaching Hospital
Department of Urology


Praveen Thumbikat

Department of Urology


Dr. Jose Tiran Saucedo

IMIGO / Universidad de Monterrey
Obstetrics and Gynaecology


Dominic Tran-Nguyen

Des Moines University


Dean Tripp

Queen's University
Psychology, Anesthesia & Urology



The Catholic University of Korea, St. Vincent's Hospital
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine


Florian M. E. Wagenlehner MD, PhD

Justus-Liebig University of Giessen
Clinic of Urology and Andrology


Assoc. Prof. Christian Wejse

Aarhus University, Aarhus University Hospital
Department of Infectious Diseases/Center for Global Health, Dept of Public Health


Prof. Dr. Mete Çek

Trakya University, School of Medicine