Literature DB >> 11950188

A comparison of urethral pressure profilometry using microtip and double-lumen perfusion catheters in women with genuine stress incontinence.

Alex C Wang1, Min-Chi Chen.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare urethral pressure profilometry measurements using microtip transducer and double-lumen perfusion catheters.
DESIGN: Prospective study.
SETTING: Tertiary referral urogynaecology unit. SAMPLE: Three hundred and ninety two non-pregnant women with various lower urinary tract symptoms.
METHODS: Multichannel urodynamic investigations were performed using double-lumen perfusion catheters with external pressure transducers in 392 women. For those 301 (76.8%) diagnosed as having genuine stress incontinence, an investigation with microtip transducers followed. For data analysis, a mixed-effects model was used to evaluate changes in the urethral profilometry and an approach proposed by Bland and Altman was applied to access agreement between the two techniques.
RESULTS: Of the 301 women with genuine stress incontinence, 272 were eligible for this study. In resting status, the differences between the two techniques were statistically significant (48.9cm H2O vs 73.4cm H2O, P = 0.0001) after adjusting for age. Moreover, the agreement study also confirmed that these two techniques do not agree sufficiently.
CONCLUSION: Maximum urethral closure pressure obtained from the double-lumen catheter was significantly higher than that obtained from the microtip catheter. Use of the double-lumen catheter for the measurement of maximum urethral closure pressure can be considered a reliable technique since its reproducibility is as good as that of the microtip catheter. Therefore, the diagnosis of 'low pressure urethra' will be different between the two techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11950188     DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01001.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJOG        ISSN: 1470-0328            Impact factor:   6.531


  10 in total

1.  Measurement of dynamic urethral pressures with a high-resolution manometry system in continent and incontinent women.

Authors:  Anna C Kirby; Jasmine Tan-Kim; Charles W Nager
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.091

2.  A multicentered comparison of measurements obtained with microtip and external water pressure transducers.

Authors:  Andrew F Hundley; Morton B Brown; Linda Brubaker; Geoffrey W Cundiff; Karl Kreder; Peter Lotze; Holly E Richter; Halina Zyczynski; Anne M Weber; Anthony G Visco
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2005-11-12

3.  Baseline urodynamic predictors of treatment failure 1 year after mid urethral sling surgery.

Authors:  Charles W Nager; Larry Sirls; Heather J Litman; Holly Richter; Ingrid Nygaard; Toby Chai; Stephen Kraus; Halina Zyczynski; Kim Kenton; Liyuan Huang; John Kusek; Gary Lemack
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 7.450

4.  Are the measurements of water-filled and air-charged catheters the same in urodynamics?

Authors:  G Alessandro Digesu; Alexandros Derpapas; Penny Robshaw; Gopalan Vijaya; Caroline Hendricken; Vik Khullar
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  A comparative study of water perfusion catheters and microtip transducer catheters for urethral pressure measurements.

Authors:  Annette Kuhn; Charles W Nager; Emma Hawkins; Jane Schulz; Stuart L Stanton
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-11-28

6.  Urodynamics, the supine empty bladder stress test, and incontinence severity.

Authors:  Charles W Nager; Stephen R Kraus; Kim Kenton; Larry Sirls; Toby C Chai; Clifford Wai; Gary Sutkin; Wendy Leng; Heather Litman; Liyuan Huang; Sharon Tennstedt; Holly E Richter
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.696

7.  Intraspinal stimulation for bladder voiding in cats before and after chronic spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Victor Pikov; Leo Bullara; Douglas B McCreery
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2007-10-02       Impact factor: 5.379

Review 8.  A comparison of external transducers and microtransducers in urodynamic studies of female patients.

Authors:  Peter M Lotze
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.862

9.  Three-Dimensional Urethral Profilometry-A Global Urethral Pressure Assessment Method.

Authors:  Wioletta Katarzyna Szepieniec; Hanna Szweda; Maksym Wróblewski; Paweł Szymanowski
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-12

10.  Urethral sleeve sensor: a non-withdrawal method to measure maximum urethral pressure.

Authors:  Jasmine Tan-Kim; Milena M Weinstein; Charles W Nager
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-01-14       Impact factor: 2.894

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.