Spinal cord · 2014
Comparison of ambulatory versus video urodynamics in patients with spinal cord injury.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства 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.
Vírseda-Chamorro M, Salinas-Casado J, de la Marta-García M, Esteban-Fuertes M, Méndez S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the data obtained through video urodynamics (VUD) with those obtained through one voiding cycle ambulatory urodynamics monitoring (AUM) in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI).
METHODS: A comparative study was conducted in 69 patients with SCI (mean age±s.d. 44±16.9 years), 51 men and 18 women, who were subjected to AUM and VUD.
RESULTS: A lack of agreement was observed between the two tests with respect to the cystometric capacity (CC) (ml) (275±197.2 AUM versus 416±198.3 VUD), filling pressure (cm H2O) (4±5.3 AUM versus 9±12.5 VUD), bladder compliance (ml cm(-1) H2O) (116±114.9 AUM versus 161±179.4 VUD), maximum detrusor contraction pressure (cm H2O) (87±65.2 AUM versus 47±35.0 VUD), post-void residual (ml) (206±201.5 AUM versus 308±237.7 VUD) and stress urinary incontinence (kappa index: -0.052). Only the CC obtained in the AUM was in agreement with the mean bladder volume gathered from the frequency-volume chart. Agreement was observed with respect to the presence of neurogenic detrusor overactivity (kappa index: 0.307) and bladder outlet obstruction index (cm H2O) (17±48.0 AUM versus 15±18.7 VUD). There was no clear association between AUM parameters and bladder neck morphology, the presence of radiological detrusor-external sphincter dyssynergy or vesicoureteral reflux observed in the VUD.
CONCLUSION: The differences between both methods discourage the use of AUM with just one voiding cycle in the evaluation of patients with SCI.
METHODS: A comparative study was conducted in 69 patients with SCI (mean age±s.d. 44±16.9 years), 51 men and 18 women, who were subjected to AUM and VUD.
RESULTS: A lack of agreement was observed between the two tests with respect to the cystometric capacity (CC) (ml) (275±197.2 AUM versus 416±198.3 VUD), filling pressure (cm H2O) (4±5.3 AUM versus 9±12.5 VUD), bladder compliance (ml cm(-1) H2O) (116±114.9 AUM versus 161±179.4 VUD), maximum detrusor contraction pressure (cm H2O) (87±65.2 AUM versus 47±35.0 VUD), post-void residual (ml) (206±201.5 AUM versus 308±237.7 VUD) and stress urinary incontinence (kappa index: -0.052). Only the CC obtained in the AUM was in agreement with the mean bladder volume gathered from the frequency-volume chart. Agreement was observed with respect to the presence of neurogenic detrusor overactivity (kappa index: 0.307) and bladder outlet obstruction index (cm H2O) (17±48.0 AUM versus 15±18.7 VUD). There was no clear association between AUM parameters and bladder neck morphology, the presence of radiological detrusor-external sphincter dyssynergy or vesicoureteral reflux observed in the VUD.
CONCLUSION: The differences between both methods discourage the use of AUM with just one voiding cycle in the evaluation of patients with SCI.