These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Correlation of abdominal leak point pressure with objective incontinence severity in men with post-radical prostatectomy stress incontinence.
    Author: Twiss C, Fleischmann N, Nitti VW.
    Journal: Neurourol Urodyn; 2005; 24(3):207-10. PubMed ID: 15791628.
    Abstract:
    AIMS: To determine if the abdominal leak point pressure (ALPP) correlates with objective incontinence severity in patients suffering from post-prostatectomy stress incontinence. METHODS: Twenty-nine men were evaluated for urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy with videourodynamics and a 24-hr pad test. ALPP was determined with and without a 7-French urodynamics catheter and the lowest value was accepted. Six patients with urgency incontinence associated with detrusor overactivity or decreased bladder compliance were excluded leaving 23 patients for analysis. The relationship between the variables of ALPP, 24-hr pad weight, age and time from prostatectomy were examined with Pearson correlation. RESULTS: The mean age was 66.4 years (SD +/- 7.9, range: 45-81) and the median time from radical prostatectomy was 23 months (IQR = 14-64, range: 9-204). The mean ALPP was 92.8 cm H(2)O (SD +/- 42.4 cm H(2)O) and the mean pad weight was 279.1 g (SD +/- 238.3 g). There was only a weak inverse correlation between ALPP and 24-hr pad weight which was not statistically significant (r = - 0.191, P = 0.38). Age and time from prostatectomy did not significantly correlate with ALPP (r = - 0.122, P = 0.58 and r = - 0.23, P = 0.29, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: ALPP did not correlate significantly with the 24-hr pad test in patients with post-prostatectomy stress incontinence. This suggests that in this patient subset, the ALPP is a relatively poor predictor of incontinence severity and, therefore, has limited clinical value in the urodynamic evaluation of post-prostatectomy incontinence. The urodynamic assessment of these patients should focus on the presence or absence of stress incontinence and on the presence of associated bladder dysfunction.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]