The Journal of urology · 1995
Correlation between micturitional urethral pressure profile and pressure-flow criteria in bladder outlet obstruction.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание 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.
DuBeau C E, Sullivan M P, Cravalho E, Resnick N M, Yalla S V
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We correlate micturitional urethral pressure profilometry with pressure-flow diagnoses of outlet obstruction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Urodynamic evaluation was done of 86 consecutive men with voiding symptoms. Obstruction criteria were a micturitional urethral pressure profile (MUPP) gradient greater than 5 cm. water, Schäfer's linear passive urethral resistance relation (PURR) greater than grade 1 and Abrams-Griffiths nomogram.
RESULTS: Interpretable results were completed in 99% of the patients undergoing MUPP and 60% undergoing pressure-flow studies (p < 0.00001). MUPP diagnosis agreed with PURR (p = 0.0015) and Abrams-Griffiths nomogram results (p = 0.00004). MUPP gradients correlated well with PURR (r = 0.70, p < 0.00001). Using optimum cutoff values (11 cm. water), the sensitivity of MUPP was 83%, specificity 82% and positive predictive value 94%.
CONCLUSIONS: MUPP correlates well with and yields interpretable results more often than pressure-flow studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Urodynamic evaluation was done of 86 consecutive men with voiding symptoms. Obstruction criteria were a micturitional urethral pressure profile (MUPP) gradient greater than 5 cm. water, Schäfer's linear passive urethral resistance relation (PURR) greater than grade 1 and Abrams-Griffiths nomogram.
RESULTS: Interpretable results were completed in 99% of the patients undergoing MUPP and 60% undergoing pressure-flow studies (p < 0.00001). MUPP diagnosis agreed with PURR (p = 0.0015) and Abrams-Griffiths nomogram results (p = 0.00004). MUPP gradients correlated well with PURR (r = 0.70, p < 0.00001). Using optimum cutoff values (11 cm. water), the sensitivity of MUPP was 83%, specificity 82% and positive predictive value 94%.
CONCLUSIONS: MUPP correlates well with and yields interpretable results more often than pressure-flow studies.