Comparative study of pressure-flow parameters

被引:17
|
作者
Eri, LM
Wessel, N
Tysland, O
Berge, V
机构
[1] Ulleval Univ Hosp, Dept Urol, Oslo, Norway
[2] Cent Hosp Akershus, Dept Urol, Nordbyhagen, Norway
关键词
benign prostatic hyperplasia; urodynamics; urethral resistance; reproducibility; sensitivity and specificity;
D O I
10.1002/nau.10018
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Methods for quantification of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) are still controversial. Parameters such as detrusor opening pressure (P-det.open), maximum detrusor pressure (P-det.max), minimum voiding pressure (P-det.min.void), and detrusor pressure at maximum flow rate (P-det.Qmax) separate obstructed from nonobstructed patients to some extent, but two nomograms, the Abrams-Griffiths nomogram and the linearized passive urethral resistance relation (LinPURR), are more accepted for this purpose, along with the urethral resistance algorithm. In this retrospective, methodologic study, we evaluated the properties of these parameters with regard to test-retest reproducibility and ability to detect a moderate (pharmacologic) and a pronounced (surgical) relief of bladder outlet obstruction. We studied the pressure-flow charts of 42 patients who underwent 24 weeks of androgen suppressive therapy, 42 corresponding patients who received placebo, and 30 patients who had prostate surgery. The patients performed repeat void pressure-flow examinations before and after treatment or placebo. The various parameters were compared. Among the bladder pressure parameters, P-det.Qmax seemed to have some advantages, supporting the belief that it is the most relevant detrusor pressure parameter to include in nomograms to quantify BOO. In assessment of a large decrease in urethral resistance, such as after TURp, resistance parameters that are based on maximum flow rate as well as detrusor pressure are preferable. (C) 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:186 / 193
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] PRESSURE-FLOW METHOD - RESPONSE
    WARREN, DW
    CLEFT PALATE-CRANIOFACIAL JOURNAL, 1991, 28 (03): : 318 - 318
  • [22] PRESSURE-FLOW STUDIES IN HYDRONEPHROSIS
    KINN, AC
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 1981, 15 (03): : 249 - 255
  • [23] BASICS OF PRESSURE-FLOW STUDIES
    GRIFFITHS, D
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1995, 13 (01) : 30 - 33
  • [24] PRESSURE-FLOW RELATIONSHIPS IN INTESTINE
    GRANTHAM, RN
    BRECHER, GA
    FEDERATION PROCEEDINGS, 1969, 28 (02) : 717 - &
  • [25] An examination of parameters in patients with pelvic organ prolapse who couldn't complete pressure-flow study
    Togo, M.
    Kitta, T.
    Kanno, Y.
    Higuchi, M.
    Ouchi, M.
    Moriya, K.
    Shinohara, N.
    INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL, 2018, 29 : S259 - S259
  • [26] Pressure-flow studies of micturition
    Griffiths, DJ
    UROLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1996, 23 (02) : 279 - &
  • [27] Continued improvement in pressure-flow parameters in men receiving finasteride for 2 years
    Schäfer, W
    Tammela, TLJ
    Barrett, DM
    Abrams, P
    Hedlund, H
    Rollema, HJ
    Nordling, J
    Andersen, JT
    Hald, T
    Matos-Ferriera, A
    Bruskewitz, R
    Miller, P
    Mustonen, S
    Cannon, A
    Malice, MP
    Jacobsen, CA
    Bach, MA
    UROLOGY, 1999, 54 (02) : 278 - 283
  • [28] CHOROIDAL BLOOD FLOW . PRESSURE-FLOW RELATIONSHIPS
    FRIEDMAN, E
    ARCHIVES OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 1970, 83 (01) : 95 - &
  • [29] Impact of urethral catheterization on uroflow during pressure-flow study
    Zhu, Bi Song
    Jiang, Hui Chuan
    Li, Yuan
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2016, 44 (05) : 1034 - 1039
  • [30] PRESSURE-FLOW STUDY - METHOD FOR MEASURING BLADDER NECK RESISTANCE
    GLEASON, DM
    LATTIMER, JK
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1962, 87 (06): : 844 - &