14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Videourodynamic Studies of Women with Voiding Dysfunction

      research-article
      1 , 2 , 3 , 1 , 3 , 4 ,
      Scientific Reports
      Nature Publishing Group UK

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This retrospective study is aimed to present videourodynamic findings of women with symptoms of voiding dysfunction in a medical center. Of 1914 women, the diagnoses included bladder outlet obstruction (BOO, n = 810, 42.3%), bladder dysfunction (n = 1,048, 54.8%) and normal tracings (n = 56, 2.9%). Anatomic BOO (n = 49) included cystocele (n = 19) and urethral stricture (n = 30). Common functional BOOs included dysfunctional voiding (n = 325, 17.0%) and poor relaxation of the external sphincter (n = 336, 17.6%). Common bladder dysfunction subtypes included detrusor underactivity (n = 337, 17.6%), detrusor hyperactivity with impaired contractility (n = 231, 12.1%), and bladder oversensitivity (n = 325, 17.0%). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were performed, and the following optimum cutoff values were determined: (1) voiding detrusor pressure at a maximum flow rate (Pdet.Qmax) = 30 cmH 2O for differentiating BOO from bladder dysfunction and normal tracings, with an ROC area of 0.78; (2) the Abrams-Griffiths number = 30 for differentiating anatomic from functional BOO, with an ROC area of 0.66; (3) post-void residual = 200 mL for differentiating bladder neck dysfunction from the other BOOs, with an ROC area of 0.69; (4) Pdet.Qmax = 30 cmH 2O for differentiating dysfunctional voiding from poor relaxation of the external sphincter with an ROC area of 0.93. The above findings can be used as initial guide for management of female BOO.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Pressure flow urodynamic studies: the gold standard for diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction.

          V W Nitti (2004)
          Bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) is a common cause of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men and women. By definition, BOO is determined urodynamically, assessing the pressure-flow relation during voiding. Since the 1960s much work has been done to standardize the urodynamic definitions of obstruction in men and more recently women. Today, urodynamic testing voiding pressure-flow analysis remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of BOO and the etiology of LUTS. The pressure-flow relation is much better defined in men than in women, but recent work suggests that although the definition of obstruction may differ between men and women, the concept of the pressure-flow relation to diagnose obstruction holds true for both genders.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction in women.

            There are no universally accepted urodynamic criteria for diagnosing female bladder outlet obstruction. When accepted criteria for men are applied to women, the diagnosis of obstruction may often be missed, which is most likely due to differences in voiding dynamics. We propose video urodynamic criteria for diagnosing obstruction in women, and describe the urodynamic findings in those with and without obstruction. We reviewed the charts of 331 women who underwent multichannel video urodynamics for nonneurogenic voiding dysfunction. Of these women 261 (mean age 55.8 years) had evaluable voiding pressure flow studies with simultaneous video fluoroscopy of the bladder outlet during voiding. At video urodynamics cases were classified as obstructed if there was radiographic evidence of obstruction between the bladder neck and distal urethra in the presence of a sustained detrusor contraction. Strict pressure flow criteria were not used. Maximum flow rate, detrusor pressure at maximum flow rate, post-void residual, bladder capacity and the incidence of detrusor instability were compared between obstructed and unobstructed cases. A total of 76 women met the criteria for obstruction (mean age 57.5 years), while 184 (mean age 55) did not. Causes of obstruction were dysfunctional voiding in 25 cases, cystocele in 21, primary bladder neck obstruction in 12, iatrogenic from incontinence surgery in 11, urethral stricture in 3, uterine prolapse in 2, urethral diverticulum in 1 and rectocele in 1. Obstructed cases had lower mean maximum flow rate (9 versus 20.2 ml. per second, p <0.0001), higher mean detrusor pressure at maximum flow rate (42.8 versus 22.1 cm. water, p <0.0001) and higher mean post-void residual (157 versus 33 ml., p <0.0001). There was no difference in bladder capacity (381 versus 347 ml.) or incidence of detrusor instability (45 versus 41%). Using the proposed video urodynamic criteria obstructed cases had significantly higher voiding pressures, lower flow rates and higher post-void residual than unobstructed cases, as expected. However, absolute values, especially for voiding pressure, are not as dramatic in women as in men. Pressure flow studies alone may fail to diagnose obstruction but simultaneous imaging of the bladder outlet during voiding greatly facilitates diagnosis.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Proposed cutoff values to define bladder outlet obstruction in women.

              There is no accepted urodynamic definition of outlet obstruction in women. Currently, the diagnosis is made on the basis of history and radiographic and endoscopic findings. The goal of this study is to design a pressure-flow nomogram (PdetQmax/Qmax) and define cut-off values for obstruction. Two groups were studied prospectively in an open study: 124 control and 35 clinically obstructed patients. All had a complete history, physical examination, normal neurologic evaluation, cystoscopy, voiding cystography, and urodynamics-with-pressure-flow study. Pressure-flow plot and receiver operator characteristic curves (ROCs) were constructed to determine optimal cut-off values to predict obstruction for peak flow rate (Qmax) and detrusor pressure at maximal flow (PdetQmax). The etiology of obstruction was previous anti-incontinence surgery (n = 13), large cystocele (n = 11), urethral stricture (n = 6), and other (n = 5). On the basis of ROC curves, using cut-off values of Qmax of 15 mL/s or less and 12 mL/s or less, sensitivity was 85.7% and 71.4%, and specificity 78.2% and 90.3%, respectively. Using cut-off values of PdetQmax of more than 25 and more than 30 cm H2O, sensitivity was 74.3% and 71.4%, and specificity 79.8% and 88.7%, respectively. Using a combined cut-off value of Qmax of 1 5 mL/s or less and PdetQmax of more than 20 cm H2O, sensitivity was 74.3% and specificity was 91.1%. Based on this prospective, controlled study, preliminary cut-off values were obtained for refining the definition of outlet obstruction in women.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                hck@tzuchi.com.tw
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                28 July 2017
                28 July 2017
                2017
                : 7
                : 6845
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0604 4784, GRID grid.414746.4, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, , Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, ; Banqiao, New Taipei Taiwan
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1770 3669, GRID grid.413050.3, Graduate School of Biotechnology and Bioengineering, , Yuan Ze University, ; Taoyuan, Taiwan
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0572 7815, GRID grid.412094.a, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, , National Taiwan University Hospital, ; Taipei, Taiwan
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0572 899X, GRID grid.414692.c, Department of Urology, , Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital and Tzu Chi University, ; Hualien, Taiwan
                Article
                7163
                10.1038/s41598-017-07163-2
                5533800
                28754926
                5d8b5320-8266-4f10-bb7a-4647e4adee49
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 16 January 2017
                : 26 June 2017
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article