Literature DB >> 8333086

Mechanical versus visual evaluation of urinary flow curves and patterns.

J B Jørgensen1, T Mortensen, T Hummelmose, J Sjørslev.   

Abstract

Flow curves from 100 consecutive patients were obtained using the Urodyn 1000 mictiograph. Four observers evaluated the flow curves blindly, i.e. without access to the mechanically estimated values. Further, the flow curve pattern was decided upon in each case. The 4 observers agreed very meticulously in the evaluation while they disagreed with the mechanically obtained results. The visually read values were significantly lower than the mechanically determined ones. At the same time the difference in Qmax was most pronounced in abnormal curves. In conclusion the mechanical evaluation of uroflow curves may be misleading and should not replace the visual evaluation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8333086     DOI: 10.1159/000282503

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urol Int        ISSN: 0042-1138            Impact factor:   2.089


  4 in total

Review 1.  Uroflow in women: an overview and suggestions for the future.

Authors:  J B Jørgensen; H Colstrup; C Frimodt-Møller
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  1998

Review 2.  Uroflowmetry in elderly men.

Authors:  K M Jensen
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Visual assessment of uroflowmetry curves: description and interpretation by urodynamists.

Authors:  Mauro Gacci; Giulio Del Popolo; Walter Artibani; Andrea Tubaro; Domenico Palli; Gianni Vittori; Alberto Lapini; Sergio Serni; Marco Carini
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-04-14       Impact factor: 3.661

4.  Development of an Automatic Interpretation Algorithm for Uroflowmetry Results: Application of Artificial Intelligence.

Authors:  Min Soo Choo; Ho Young Ryu; Sangchul Lee
Journal:  Int Neurourol J       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 2.835

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.