Neurourology and urodynamics · 2005
A urodynamics protocol to optimally assess men with post-prostatectomy incontinence.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Huckabay Chad, Twiss Christian, Berger Aaron, Nitti Victor W
Аннотация
AIMS: To propose a urodynamic protocol to comprehensively assess all parameters of post prostatectomy incontinence (PPI).
METHODS: Sixty men with a history of PPI after radical prostatectomy prospectively underwent a standardized video urodynamics protocol. A 7F urethral catheter was used for standard cystometry, abdominal leak point pressure (ALPP), and pressure flow measurements. The International Continence Society nomogram classified obstruction and further classification of obstruction was based on fluoro voiding cystourethrography and non-invasive flow rates (free Qmax).
RESULTS: Twenty-four (40%) men had detrusor overactivity with 8 (13%) also having detrusor overactivity incontinence. Only one patient had impaired compliance. All men had urodynamic stress incontinence, but 21 (35%) men demonstrated it only after removal of the urethral catheter. For men leaking with and without the urethral catheter, the respective ALPP was significantly different, 86.3 and 67 cmH2O, respectively (P = 0.002). The men who leaked only in the absence of the urethral catheter had significantly higher ALPP measurements, P < 0.001. After reclassification using the fluoroscopic images of the bladder outlet and free Qmax, only 13.3% patients were obstructed.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed urodynamic protocol allows for an optimal assessment of bladder and sphincter dysfunction and outlet obstruction in men with PPI.
METHODS: Sixty men with a history of PPI after radical prostatectomy prospectively underwent a standardized video urodynamics protocol. A 7F urethral catheter was used for standard cystometry, abdominal leak point pressure (ALPP), and pressure flow measurements. The International Continence Society nomogram classified obstruction and further classification of obstruction was based on fluoro voiding cystourethrography and non-invasive flow rates (free Qmax).
RESULTS: Twenty-four (40%) men had detrusor overactivity with 8 (13%) also having detrusor overactivity incontinence. Only one patient had impaired compliance. All men had urodynamic stress incontinence, but 21 (35%) men demonstrated it only after removal of the urethral catheter. For men leaking with and without the urethral catheter, the respective ALPP was significantly different, 86.3 and 67 cmH2O, respectively (P = 0.002). The men who leaked only in the absence of the urethral catheter had significantly higher ALPP measurements, P < 0.001. After reclassification using the fluoroscopic images of the bladder outlet and free Qmax, only 13.3% patients were obstructed.
CONCLUSIONS: The proposed urodynamic protocol allows for an optimal assessment of bladder and sphincter dysfunction and outlet obstruction in men with PPI.