| Literature DB >> 36008830 |
Masatake Shinohara1,2, Kazumasa Torimoto2, Chie Matsushita1,3, Daisuke Gotoh2, Hisashi Yoshida4, Toshihisa Saka1, Yoshihiko Hirao1, Akihide Hirayama5, Kiyohide Fujimoto6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To develop a nomogram of urinary volume and flow based on the data of Japanese men without lower urinary tract symptoms and multiple flows per participant whose characteristics were clear.Entities:
Keywords: Age; Man; Nomogram; Urinary flow rate; Urinary volume
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36008830 PMCID: PMC9414110 DOI: 10.1186/s12894-022-01086-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Urol ISSN: 1471-2490 Impact factor: 2.090
Fig. 1P-Flowdiary®
Background of participants
| Age groups (years) | Number of participants | Frequency | Age (years), mean ± SD | Weight (kg), mean ± SD | BMI (kg/m2), mean ± SD | Maximum flow rate (mL/s), mean ± SD | Mean flow rate (mL/s), mean ± SD | Voided volume (mL), mean ± SD | IPSS, mean ± SD | QOL, mean ± SD | OABSS, mean ± SD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20–29 | 30 | 282 | 24.8 ± 2.5 | 62.9 ± 10.4 | 21.5 ± 2.8 | 20.5 ± 6.7 | 7.5 ± 3.6 | 203.9 ± 115.3 | 0.2 ± 0.4 | 0.1 ± 0.3 | 0.1 ± 0.3 |
| 30–39 | 25 | 183 | 34.5 ± 2.8 | 66.4 ± 10.8 | 22.6 ± 3.4 | 22.1 ± 7.6 | 7.9 ± 3.1 | 241.4 ± 122.2 | 0.28 ± 0.72 | 0.08 ± 0.27 | 0.16 ± 0.46 |
| 40–49 | 21 | 180 | 43.4 ± 2.9 | 70.9 ± 10.1 | 24.3 ± 3.6 | 22.9 ± 7.5 | 8.7 ± 3.8 | 285.4 ± 142.8 | 0.48 ± 0.79 | 0.14 ± 0.35 | 0.33 ± 0.64 |
| 50–59 | 25 | 249 | 55.0 ± 2.9 | 67.8 ± 11.2 | 22.4 ± 3.3 | 18.9 ± 6.6 | 7.5 ± 3.5 | 228.3 ± 135.4 | 0.8 ± 1.2 | 0.24 ± 0.65 | 0.44 ± 0.64 |
| Total | 101 | 894 | 38.5 ± 11.8 | 67.5 ± 11.8 | 22.8 ± 3.5 | 21.3 ± 6.9 | 8.1 ± 3.4 | 244.1 ± 129.1 | 0.42 ± 0.72 | 0.13 ± 0.31 | 0.24 ± 0.5 |
IPSS, International Prostate Symptom Score; QOL, Quality of Life score; OABSS, Overactive Bladder Symptom Score; SD, standard deviation
Comparison of the coefficients of determination (R2) among the 3 regression models to represent the relationships between voided volume and maximum flow rate
| Age groups (years) | Coefficient of determination (R2), mean ± SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Quadratic regression | Linear regression | Logarithmic regression | |
| 20–29 | 0.92 ± 0.06 | 0.70 ± 0.17**** | 0.82 ± 0.13** |
| 30–39 | 0.93 ± 0.06 | 0.65 ± 0.21**** | 0.81 ± 0.11** |
| 40–49 | 0.94 ± 0.05 | 0.74 ± 0.17**** | 0.85 ± 0.09* |
| 50–59 | 0.91 ± 0.07 | 0.66 ± 0.21**** | 0.83 ± 0.10 |
| 20–59 | 0.93 ± 0.06 | 0.69 ± 0.21**** | 0.83 ± 0.13**** |
Data are described as mean ± standard deviation
Ordinary 1-way analysis of variance and Dunnett’s multiple comparison test were used
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001: compared with quadratic regression
Fig. 2Representative graphs of the quadratic regression models: A 28-year-old man (R2 = 0.9488) and B 52-year-old man (R2 = 0.9269)
Maximum flow rates with a voided volume > 150 mL
| Age group (years) | Frequency | Maximum flow rate (mL/s), mean ± SD | 95% Confidence interval |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20–29 | 179 | 24.14 ± 4.94*** | 23.41–24.87 |
| 30–39 | 143 | 24.05 ± 6.99** | 22.90–25.21 |
| 40–49 | 158 | 24.64 ± 5.72**** | 23.74–25.54 |
| 50–59 | 177 | 21.8 ± 5.05 | 21.05–22.55 |
| Total | 657 | 23.61 ± 5.76 | 23.17–24.05 |
Data are described as mean ± standard deviation
Ordinary 1-way analysis of variance and Dunnett’s multiple comparison test were used
**P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, ****P < 0.0001: compared with the 50–59-year age group
Fig. 3Nomograms on voided volume and maximum flow rate: A younger group (20–49 years; mean: 4.92 mL/s) and B older group (50–59 years; mean: 4.04 mL/s), with dark gray area representing ± 1 SD and light gray area representing ± 2 SD