Literature DB >> 19659551

Residual fraction as a parameter to predict bladder outlet obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms.

Ja Hyeon Ku1, Sung Yong Cho, Seung-June Oh.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether noninvasive tests including the residual fraction are reliable for the diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO).
METHODS: A total of 212 men (median age 68, range 44-89 years) were included in the present study. The median serum prostate-specific antigen level and prostate volume were 1.3 ng/mL (range 0.2 to 9.4) and 37.9 mL (range 11.3 to 148.0), respectively.
RESULTS: Among the variables analyzed in the multivariate model, the likelihood of BOO varied by the total prostate volume, with a 3.6-fold higher odds for >or=40 mL than for <40 mL (odds ratio [OR], 3.616; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.217-10.749; P = 0.021). In the same model, a low maximal flow rate (Qmax) (OR, 2.840; 95% CI, 1.260-6.401; P = 0.012) and high residual fraction (OR, 7.103; 95% CI, 1.924-26.225; P = 0.003) were associated with an increased likelihood of BOO. The sensitivity and specificity for predicting BOO using a total prostate volume of 40 mL or greater were 73.7% and 65.2%, respectively. Using a Qmax cut-off of 12 mL/s or less for predicting BOO, the sensitivity and specificity were 77.2% and 54.2%, respectively. Prediction of the BOO by the residual fraction only had a sensitivity and specificity, for a residual fraction of less than 20%, of 75.4% and 67.7%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence or absence of BOO might be predicted using non-invasive methods. The residual fraction may help with patient management by better predicting the likely patient classification from pressure-flow studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19659551     DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2009.02354.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Urol        ISSN: 0919-8172            Impact factor:   3.369


  4 in total

Review 1.  Is multichannel urodynamic assessment necessary before considering a surgical treatment of BPH? Pros and cons.

Authors:  Xavier Biardeau; Mohamed A Elkoushy; Shachar Aharony; Mostafa Elhilali; Jacques Corcos
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Bladder outlet obstruction number: a good indicator of infravesical obstruction in patients with benign prostatic enlargement?

Authors:  Damir Aganovic; Hajrudin Spahovic; Alden Prcic; Osman Hadziosmanovic
Journal:  Bosn J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.363

3.  Clinical Implications of Residual Urine in Korean Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) Patients: A Prognostic Factor for BPH-Related Clinical Events.

Authors:  Young Hwii Ko; Ji Yun Chae; Seung Min Jeong; Jae Il Kang; Hong Jae Ahn; Hyung Woo Kim; Sung Gu Kang; Hoon Ah Jang; Jun Cheon; Je Jong Kim; Jeong Gu Lee
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2010-12-31       Impact factor: 2.835

4.  Does the combination of intravesical prostatic protrusion and bladder outlet obstruction number increase test accuracy according to benign prostatic obstruction at the individual level?

Authors:  Damir Aganovic; Alden Prcic; Osman Hadziosmanovic; Munira Hasanbegovic
Journal:  Acta Inform Med       Date:  2012-09
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.