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: Reproducibility of same session repeated cystometry and pressure-flow studies in women with symptoms of urinary incontinence.
    Author: Broekhuis SR, Kluivers KB, Hendriks JC, Massolt ET, Groen J, Vierhout ME.
    Journal: Neurourol Urodyn; 2010 Mar; 29(3):428-31. PubMed ID: 19618451.
    Abstract:
    AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the reproducibility of same session repeated urodynamic measurements in women with symptoms of urinary incontinence. METHODS: Women presenting with symptoms of urinary incontinence underwent standardized urodynamic examination, which consisted of free uroflowmetry and two filling cystometries and pressure-flow studies. Intra-class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and McNemar tests were used to describe the same session reproducibility. RESULTS: Two evaluable urodynamic tests were available in 152 patients. Overall, reproducibility of the urodynamic parameters were good to excellent (ICC range: 0.72-0.93), except for the bladder volume at first sensation of bladder filling (ICC = 0.46) and the maximum Watt's factor (ICC = 0.68). The bladder volume at first sensation and the maximum cystometric capacity were systematically higher in the second run (mean difference (95% CI) = -45 (-73; -37) and -3 (-15; 10), respectively). Reproducibility of the diagnosis stress urinary incontinence and/or detrusor overactivity were good to excellent (median ICC = 0.76, P = 0.68 and P = 1.00, respectively). Reproducibility of the volume and amplitude at involuntary detrusor contractions, however, were only poor (ICC = 0.18 and 0.25, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The reproducibility of same session repeated urodynamic measurements in women with symptoms of urinary incontinence was good to excellent. Our results provide the scientific support for guidelines that recommend the omission of repeated filling cystometries and pressure-flow studies in cases where the first test confirms the pathology expected.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]