Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Use of uroflow parameters in diagnosing an overactive bladder-Back to the drawing board.
Futyma, Konrad; Nowakowski, Lukasz; Bogusiewicz, Michal; Zietek, Alicja; Wieczorek, Andrzej P; Rechberger, Tomasz.
Afiliación
  • Futyma K; 2nd Department of Gynecology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
  • Nowakowski L; 2nd Department of Gynecology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
  • Bogusiewicz M; 2nd Department of Gynecology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
  • Zietek A; 2nd Department of Gynecology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
  • Wieczorek AP; Department of Pediatric Radiology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
  • Rechberger T; 2nd Department of Gynecology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
Neurourol Urodyn ; 36(1): 198-202, 2017 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26451870
AIMS: The aim of our study was to analyze whether uroflowmetry parameters are helpful in diagnosing overactive bladder (OAB). The working hypothesis was that the flow curves of patients with OAB symptoms would appear as a sharp peak flow rate with a short duration and high amplitude, lasting only for a short period during urgency sensation, followed by reduced urine flow. We introduced a new parameter called flow index (FI) defined as an average divided by maximal urine flow rates as a potential marker for diagnosing OAB. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study analyzing 757 urodynamic studies performed in women with lower urinary tract symptoms between 2007-2014. Based on subjective clinical symptoms patients were divided into four groups (pure OAB, mixed urinary incontinence with predominant OAB [MUI-OAB], mixed urinary incontinence with predominant SUI [MUI-SUI], and pure SUI patients). RESULTS: When comparing FI between pure OAB and pure SUI patients, a strong statistically significant difference was found (mean 0.45 ± 0.08 vs. 0.53 ± 0.09, respectively; P < 0.001). Similar results were found when comparing the patients with pure OAB and MUI-OAB versus patients with pure SUI and MUI-SUI (mean 0.47 ± 0.11 vs. 0.53 ± 0.09, respectively; P < 0.001). On the other hand, we did not find a statistically significant difference in the FI value between mixed urinary incontinence where SUI is the predominant factor and pure SUI groups (median 0.51 ± 0.09 vs. 0.53 ± 0.09, respectively; P > 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: FI may be used as an additional marker for OAB diagnosis. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:198-202, 2017. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Urodinámica / Vejiga Urinaria Hiperactiva Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Neurourol Urodyn Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Polonia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Urodinámica / Vejiga Urinaria Hiperactiva Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Neurourol Urodyn Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Polonia Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos