Urology · 1998
Value of urethral pressure profilometry in the female incontinent patient: a prospective trial with an 8-channel urethral catheter.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Haeusler G, Tempfer C, Heinzl H, Sam C, Hefler L, Hanzal E, Koelbl H
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To measure the pressure profiles at different positions of the urethral circumference simultaneously.
METHODS: Twenty-two women with symptoms of genuine stress incontinence underwent urogynecologic assessment and multichannel urethral pressure profilometry (UPP) at rest with a specially designed 8-channel urethral catheter with radial openings.
RESULTS: The distribution pattern of maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) and functional urethral length (FUL) values were significantly different (P=0.004 and P=0.0004, respectively). Most of the highest MUCP values per patient were found between channels 2 and 4 (P=0.015); most of the greatest FUL values per patient were found between channels 3 and 4 (P=0.15).
CONCLUSIONS: The data of our study substantiate asymmetric radial pressure distribution within the urethra and underline the necessity of cautious interpretation of results of conventional single-channel UPP, which might vary because of transducer orientation.
METHODS: Twenty-two women with symptoms of genuine stress incontinence underwent urogynecologic assessment and multichannel urethral pressure profilometry (UPP) at rest with a specially designed 8-channel urethral catheter with radial openings.
RESULTS: The distribution pattern of maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) and functional urethral length (FUL) values were significantly different (P=0.004 and P=0.0004, respectively). Most of the highest MUCP values per patient were found between channels 2 and 4 (P=0.015); most of the greatest FUL values per patient were found between channels 3 and 4 (P=0.15).
CONCLUSIONS: The data of our study substantiate asymmetric radial pressure distribution within the urethra and underline the necessity of cautious interpretation of results of conventional single-channel UPP, which might vary because of transducer orientation.