Literature DB >> 21660426

Urodynamically diagnosed detrusor hypocontractility: should transurethral resection of the prostate be contraindicated?

Rubiao Ou1, Chaojie Pan, Hui Chen, Suishan Wu, Xinghua Wei, Xiangrong Deng, Ping Tang, Keji Xie.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) suffering from hypocontractile detrusor were generally regarded unsuitable for surgery. This prospective study is to evaluate the efficacy of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) on BPH patients diagnosed detrusor hypocontractility on urodynamic study (UDs).
METHODS: Twenty patients were included in the study with mean age of 74.20 ± 7.93 years (range: 57-88). Outcomes were determined by patients' self-assessment questionnaires, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and Quality of Life (QoL), and UDs parameters including maximum uroflow rate (Qmax), postvoid urine volume (PVR), bladder compliance, maximal cystometric capacity (MCC), and maximum detrusor pressure (Pdetmax).
RESULTS: Median follow-up duration was 12 months (range: 10-16). After TURP, IPSS/QoL, Qmax, PVR, and Pdetmax were significantly improved and there were no significant differences with regard to bladder compliance and MCC.
CONCLUSION: UDs may play a very limited role in detecting bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in BPH patients with hypocontractile detrusor. TURP may obtain a promising effect on such patients with unidentified BOO. These patients should not be arbitrarily excluded from surgical indications simply based on UDs findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21660426     DOI: 10.1007/s11255-011-0010-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol        ISSN: 0301-1623            Impact factor:   2.370


  17 in total

1.  The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society.

Authors:  Paul Abrams; Linda Cardozo; Magnus Fall; Derek Griffiths; Peter Rosier; Ulf Ulmsten; Philip van Kerrebroeck; Arne Victor; Alan Wein
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.696

2.  Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies.

Authors:  Werner Schäfer; Paul Abrams; Limin Liao; Anders Mattiasson; Francesco Pesce; Anders Spangberg; Arthur M Sterling; Norman R Zinner; Philip van Kerrebroeck
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.696

3.  Urodynamics prior to prostatectomy: pro.

Authors:  Stephan Madersbacher
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 20.096

4.  Prognostic value of pressure-flow study in surgical treatment of benign prostatic obstruction.

Authors:  M Gotoh; Y Yoshikawa; A S Kondo; A Kondo; Y Ono; S Ohshima
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Videourodynamic studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms: a comparison of community based versus referral urological practices.

Authors:  F Fusco; A Groutz; J G Blaivas; D C Chaikin; J P Weiss
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Impaired detrusor contractility in community-dwelling elderly presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms.

Authors:  Joseph Abarbanel; Esther-Lee Marcus
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.649

7.  Detrusor instability with equivocal obstruction: A predictor of unfavorable symptomatic outcomes after transurethral prostatectomy.

Authors:  Rintaro Machino; Hidehiro Kakizaki; Kaname Ameda; Takashi Shibata; Hiroshi Tanaka; Shinobu Matsuura; Tomohiko Koyanagi
Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.696

8.  Detrusor resistive index evaluated by Doppler ultrasonography as a potential indicator of bladder outlet obstruction.

Authors:  A Belenky; Y Abarbanel; M Cohen; O Yossepowitch; P M Livne; G N Bachar
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Conventional urodynamics and ambulatory monitoring in the definition and management of bladder outflow obstruction.

Authors:  A S Robertson; C Griffiths; D E Neal
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  The efficacy of transurethral resection of the prostate in the patients with weak bladder contractility index.

Authors:  Deok Hyun Han; Yong Sang Jeong; Myung-Soo Choo; Kyu-Sung Lee
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2008-03-03       Impact factor: 2.649

View more
  7 in total

1.  Picking your prostates.

Authors:  Blayne Welk
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 2.  Current pharmacological and surgical treatment of underactive bladder.

Authors:  Yuan-Hong Jiang; Cheng-Ling Lee; Jia-Fong Jhang; Hann-Chorng Kuo
Journal:  Ci Ji Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2017 Oct-Dec

Review 3.  Clinical implications of underactive bladder.

Authors:  Kwang Jin Ko; Chung Un Lee; Kyu-Sung Lee
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2017-11-22

4.  Transurethral resection of prostate in benign prostatic enlargement with underactive bladder: A retrospective outcome analysis.

Authors:  Ashok Kumar Sokhal; Rahul Janak Sinha; Bimalesh Purkait; Vishwajeet Singh
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

5.  Surgical treatment of detrusor underactivity: a short term proof of concept study.

Authors:  Jerry G Blaivas; James C Forde; Jonathan L Davila; Lucas Policastro; Michael Tyler; Joshua Aizen; Anand Badri; Rajveer S Purohit; Jeffrey P Weiss
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2017 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

6.  The role of intra-operative void score during transurethral resection of prostate as a marker of efficacy: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Christian Robinson; Alastair Hepburn; Robin M Turner; Amir D Zarrabi
Journal:  ANZ J Surg       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 2.025

Review 7.  Role of videourodynamic study in precision diagnosis and treatment for lower urinary tract dysfunction.

Authors:  Yuan-Hong Jiang; Sheng-Fu Chen; Hann-Chorng Kuo
Journal:  Ci Ji Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2019-11-18
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.