OBJECTIVES: To detect obstruction in patients with LUTS suggestive of BPH comparing the prostatic intravesical protrusion detected by abdominal ultrasounds with uroflowmetry testing results with urodynamic study to make evidence of obstruction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A series of 25 patients (mean age 67.9 years) at the first visit for BPH problems, underwent to routine examination including: abdominal ultrasound examination, TRUS, uroflowmetry IPSS and QoL questionnaires and urodynamic evaluation. We evaluated the degree in mm of prostatic intravesical protrusion by ultrasounds with a bladder volume between 150-220 cc. The degree of protrusion was classified as mild (<5 mm), moderate (5-10 mm) and severe (>10 mm), Qmax was divided in obstructed (<10 ml/s), equivocal (10-15 ml/s) and unobstructed (>15 ml/s). Confirmation or not of obstruction was validated by urodynamic study. RESULTS: mean prostate volume was 41.4cc; IPSS 22.4; Quality of Life 4.0; post voided residual urine 97.8 cc; DAMPF 62.6; Schäfer 3.4; Qmax 9.9 ml/s. Almost all the patients with severe protrusion had obstructed flow confirmed by P/F study. Patients with severe protrusion and unobstructedflow have obstruction compensated by high pressure voiding. CONCLUSIONS: These results, despite of the numbers of patients, suggest that the degree of prostatic protrusion measured by abdominal ultrasounds is a data that, if correlated to obstructed Qmax, can be used in the evaluation of BPH patients and their grade of obstruction.
OBJECTIVES: To detect obstruction in patients with LUTS suggestive of BPH comparing the prostatic intravesical protrusion detected by abdominal ultrasounds with uroflowmetry testing results with urodynamic study to make evidence of obstruction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A series of 25 patients (mean age 67.9 years) at the first visit for BPH problems, underwent to routine examination including: abdominal ultrasound examination, TRUS, uroflowmetry IPSS and QoL questionnaires and urodynamic evaluation. We evaluated the degree in mm of prostatic intravesical protrusion by ultrasounds with a bladder volume between 150-220 cc. The degree of protrusion was classified as mild (<5 mm), moderate (5-10 mm) and severe (>10 mm), Qmax was divided in obstructed (<10 ml/s), equivocal (10-15 ml/s) and unobstructed (>15 ml/s). Confirmation or not of obstruction was validated by urodynamic study. RESULTS: mean prostate volume was 41.4cc; IPSS 22.4; Quality of Life 4.0; post voided residual urine 97.8 cc; DAMPF 62.6; Schäfer 3.4; Qmax 9.9 ml/s. Almost all the patients with severe protrusion had obstructed flow confirmed by P/F study. Patients with severe protrusion and unobstructedflow have obstruction compensated by high pressure voiding. CONCLUSIONS: These results, despite of the numbers of patients, suggest that the degree of prostatic protrusion measured by abdominal ultrasounds is a data that, if correlated to obstructed Qmax, can be used in the evaluation of BPH patients and their grade of obstruction.