Pressure-flow studies: Short-time repeatability

Hansen, Frank; Olsen, Lene; Atan, Ali; Nordling, Jørgen

doi:10.1002/(sici)1520-6777(1999)18:3<205::aid-nau7>3.0.co;2-8

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a recent study performed in our clinic, we found a moderate intra-patient reproducibility of PFS [Sonke et al, 1999]. However, better results concerning reproducibility were reported earlier [vd Beek et al, 1992;Madsen et al, 1995;Rosier et al, 1995;Hansen et al, 1997Hansen et al, , 1999. A distinction should be made between reproducibility within one session of two PFS and reproducibility of two PFS performed at different occasions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 52%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intra- and inter-investigator variation in the analysis of pressure-flow studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms

et al. 2000

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 52%

“…Hansen et al [1999] investigated the short-time reproducibility of PFS. In 20 patients they performed four PFS in two sessions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intra- and inter-investigator variation in the analysis of pressure-flow studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms

et al. 2000

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the Broekhuis et al14 series, the post‐miction residue was reproducible with a CCI of 0.80. In conventional urodynamic studies in prostatic syndrome patients, Hansen et al24 and Tammela et al25 found that this parameter is reproducible, although other parameters of the micturition phase were not, such as the pressure of the detrusor with maximal flow or the parameters of ureteral resistance and detrusor contractility.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Never say never, but tread lightly through vena cava filters

Gilchrist

2009

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Poor reproducibility of pressure‐flow parameters in conventional urodynamic study, such as Q max , P det. Q max , and voided volume, on immediate re‐testing and after short‐term follow‐up has been reported in males and females 4,18 . Considerable variability is noted when pressure/flow studies are repeated on the same day, with 25–39% of subjects having a urodynamic diagnosis of obstruction change to equivocal or unobstructed in the second study 4,18,19 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Q max , and voided volume, on immediate re‐testing and after short‐term follow‐up has been reported in males and females 4,18 . Considerable variability is noted when pressure/flow studies are repeated on the same day, with 25–39% of subjects having a urodynamic diagnosis of obstruction change to equivocal or unobstructed in the second study 4,18,19 . Kortmann et al 20 reported that the reproducibility of manual analysis of urodynamic studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms is only moderate due to considerable intra‐ and inter‐investigator variation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambulatory Urodynamics in Asymptomatic, Young, Healthy Male Volunteers

Yamanishi

Masuda

Mizuno

et al. 2009

LUTS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:To assess the incidence of detrusor overactivity and reproducibility of data from ambulatory urodynamic monitoring (AUM) in male volunteers. Methods: Sixteen asymptomatic healthy male volunteers with a mean age of 26.3 years (range: 22-30) underwent AUM by natural filling cystometry followed by a pressure/flow study. The studies were repeated three times. Results: Detrusor overactivity (DO) was detected in six subjects (37.5%), but clinically significant detrusor overactivity was noted only in three (18.8%). Q max , detrusor opening pressure, and P det Q max were similar among the three measurements. The bladder outlet obstruction index (BOOI) varied, and there was a significant difference between the first and third measurements (P = 0.0371). Obstruction grade was ranked as unobstructed in all studies for 13 subjects, equivocal (BOOI 45 and 46) in one subject, and both unobstructed and equivocal (BOOI 30, 43 and 30) in one subject. There was a significant difference in bladder contractility index (BCI) between the first and third studies (P = 0.0186). The BCI was always strong in five subjects, always normal in eight subjects, and strong to normal in three subjects. Conclusion: DO was found in 37.5% of male volunteers. BOOI and BCI may not be highly reproducible, and the third study may provide the best result if the first and second studies differ. However, 87.5% of subjects were rated as unobstructed and all subjects were rated as normal or strong, with the categories of obstruction and bladder contractility showing no change in most subjects. AUM with three studies seem adequate for the evaluation of lower urinary tract dysfunction in males.

show abstract

Pressure-flow studies: Short-time repeatability

Cited by 15 publications

References 11 publications

Intra- and inter-investigator variation in the analysis of pressure-flow studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms

Intra- and inter-investigator variation in the analysis of pressure-flow studies in men with lower urinary tract symptoms

Never say never, but tread lightly through vena cava filters

Ambulatory Urodynamics in Asymptomatic, Young, Healthy Male Volunteers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About