Literature DB >> 21305591

Comparison of air-charged and water-filled urodynamic pressure measurement catheters.

M A Cooper1, P C Fletter, P J Zaszczurynski, M S Damaser.   

Abstract

AIMS: Catheter systems are utilized to measure pressure for diagnosis of voiding dysfunction. In a clinical setting, patient movement and urodynamic pumps introduce hydrostatic and motion artifacts into measurements. Therefore, complete characterization of a catheter system includes its response to artifacts as well its frequency response. The objective of this study was to compare the response of two disposable clinical catheter systems: water-filled and air-charged, to controlled pressure signals to assess their similarities and differences in pressure transduction.
METHODS: We characterized frequency response using a transient step test, which exposed the catheters to a sudden change in pressure; and a sinusoidal frequency sweep test, which exposed the catheters to a sinusoidal pressure wave from 1 to 30 Hz. The response of the catheters to motion artifacts was tested using a vortex and the response to hydrostatic pressure changes was tested by moving the catheter tips to calibrated heights.
RESULTS: Water-filled catheters acted as an underdamped system, resonating at 10.13 ± 1.03 Hz and attenuating signals at frequencies higher than 19 Hz. They demonstrated significant motion and hydrostatic artifacts. Air-charged catheters acted as an overdamped system and attenuated signals at frequencies higher than 3.02 ± 0.13 Hz. They demonstrated significantly less motion and hydrostatic artifacts than water-filled catheters. The transient step and frequency sweep tests gave comparable results.
CONCLUSIONS: Air-charged and water-filled catheters respond to pressure changes in dramatically different ways. Knowledge of the characteristics of the pressure-measuring system is essential to finding the best match for a specific application.
Copyright © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21305591     DOI: 10.1002/nau.20991

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn        ISSN: 0733-2467            Impact factor:   2.696


  12 in total

1.  Wireless, Ultra-Low-Power Implantable Sensor for Chronic Bladder Pressure Monitoring.

Authors:  Steve J A Majerus; Steven L Garverick; Michael A Suster; Paul C Fletter; Margot S Damaser
Journal:  ACM J Emerg Technol Comput Syst       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 1.420

2.  Comment: are the measurements of water-filled and air-charged catheters the same in urodynamics?

Authors:  Françoise A Valentini
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Instrumented Urethral Catheter and Its Ex Vivo Validation in a Sheep Urethra.

Authors:  Mahdi Ahmadi; Rajesh Rajamani; Gerald Timm; Serdar Sezen
Journal:  Meas Sci Technol       Date:  2017-01-13       Impact factor: 2.046

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.  Comparison of the cough stress test and 24-h pad test in the assessment of stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  Danielle Markle Price; Karen Noblett
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-16       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Clinical evaluation of a high-fidelity wireless intravaginal pressure sensor.

Authors:  Anuprita S Arora; Jennifer A Kruger; David M Budgett; Lynsey M Hayward; Jackie Smalldridge; Poul F Nielsen; Robert S Kirton
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  Head-to-head comparison of pressures during full cystometry, with clinical as well as in-depth signal-analysis, of air-filled catheters versus the ICS-standard water-filled catheters.

Authors:  Peter F W M Rosier
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2021-08-07       Impact factor: 2.367

Review 8.  The pathophysiology of stress urinary incontinence: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kobra Falah-Hassani; Joanna Reeves; Rahman Shiri; Duane Hickling; Linda McLean
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 1.932

Review 9.  Optical Fibre Pressure Sensors in Medical Applications.

Authors:  Sven Poeggel; Daniele Tosi; DineshBabu Duraibabu; Gabriel Leen; Deirdre McGrath; Elfed Lewis
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 3.576

10.  Urodynamic Investigation: A Valid Tool to Define Normal Lower Urinary Tract Function?

Authors:  Lorenz Leitner; Matthias Walter; Ulla Sammer; Stephanie C Knüpfer; Ulrich Mehnert; Thomas M Kessler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.