Ces Urol 2006, 10(3):18-23 | DOI: 10.48095/cccu2006018

Multichannel urethral profilometry in diagnosing incontinence: a clinical study

F. Zá»ura, R. Vrtal
Urologická klinika FN a LF UP v Olomouci

Objective: To evaluate the effect of the position of the measuring catheter opening in the urethra during urethral pressure profilometry.

Material and methods: Fifty-six patients with incontinence underwent four-channel urethral profilometry with a specially designed device. The parameters of maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) and functional urethral length (FUL) were evaluated statistically. In addition, a new parameter of ?maximum circumferential pressure? was proposed.

Results: A statistical analysis in 38 and 35 patients with stress incontinence revealed that the distribution pattern of MUCP in individual measuring positions could not be considered even. Using confidence intervals, an estimate of the positions in which mean MUCP values occurred was set at 277° (CI 95 %). The tests performed to evaluate the functional urethral length showed statistically significant differences at the level of significance of alpha = 0.05. Thus, the distribution pattern of functional urethral length in individual measuring positions cannot be considered even.

Conclusion: Measurement of the urethral pressure profile in a single measuring position of the catheter opening with respect to the urethral circumference is not of sufficient validity and may even result in diagnostic error.

Keywords: urodynamics, urethral pressure profile, UPP, incontinence, multichannel profilometry

Published: June 1, 2006 


References

  1. Brown M. Wickham JE. The urethral pressure profile. BJU, 1969, 41, 211-217. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  2. Schäfer W, Abrams P, Liao L, Mattiasson A, Pesce F, Spangberg A, Sterling AM, Zinner NR, van Kerrebroeck P. Good Urodynamic Practices: Uroflowmetry, Filling Cystometry, and Pressure-Flow Studies. Neurourology and Urodynamics 21: 261-274 (2002). Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  3. Lose G, Griffiths D, Hosker D, Kulseng-Hanssen S, Perucchini D, Schäfer W, Thind P, Versi E. Standardisation of Urethral Pressure Meassurement: Report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol. Urodyn. Issue 2, 2002. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Weber AM. Is urethral pressure profilometry a useful diagnostic test for stress urinary incontinence? Obstet and Gyn Survey 2001, 56, 720-735. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  5. Martan A, Masata J, Svabik K, Drahoradova P, Pavlikova M, Hlasenska J. Changes in values of urethral closure pressure and its position after TVT operation-predictive value of MUCP and VLPP for successful rate of this operation Ceska Gynekol. 2005 Sep; 70 (5): 370-376.
  6. Martan A, Masata J, Svabik K, Drahoradova P, Hlasenska J, Pavlikova M. Correlation between urethral mobility and maximal urethral closure pressure and Valsalva leak-point pressure in women with urinary stress incontinence. Ceska Gynekol. 2005 Mar; 70 (2): 123- 128.
  7. Nager CW, Schulz EA, Stanton SL, Monga A. Correlation of Urethral Closure Pressure, Leak-Point Pressure and Incontinence Severity Measures Int Urogynecol J (2001) 12: 395-400. Go to original source...
  8. Mikhail MS, Rosa H, Palan P, Anderson P. Comparison of preoperative and postoperative pressure transmission ratio and urethral pressure profilometry in patients with successful outcome following the vaginal wall patch sling technique. Neurourol Urodyn. 2005;(1). 31-34. Go to original source...
  9. The Urethral Pressure Profile and Ultrasound Imaging of the Lower Urinary Tract HP. Dietz and B. Clarke. nt Urogynecol J (2001) 12: 38-41. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  10. Pajoncini C, Costantini E, Guercini F, Porena M.Intrinsic sphincter deficiency: do the maximum urethral closure pressure and the Valsalva leak-point pressure identify different pathogenic mechanisms? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2002; 13 (1): 30-35. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  11. Pajoncini C, Costantini E, Guercini F, Bini V, Porena M. Clinical and urodynamic features of intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Neurourol Urodyn. 2003; 22 (4): 264-268. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  12. Wang AC, Chen Min-Chi. A comparison of urethral pressure profilometry using microtip and double-lumen perfusion catheters in women with genuine stress incontinence. Bjog: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Volume 109 Issue 3 Page 322 - March 2002. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  13. Haeusler G, Temper AE, Heinzl A, Sam Ch, Hefler L, Hanzal E, Keoelbl H. Value of Urethral Pressure Profilometry in the Female Incontinent Patient: A Prospective Trial With an 8Channel Urehral Catether Urology. 52 (6), 1998.
  14. Slack M, Cullinmgham P, Tracey M et all. Relationship of Urethral Retroresistance Pressure to Urodynamic Meassurement and Incontinence Severity. Neurourology and Urodynamics 23, 109-114 (2004). Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  15. Pollak JT, Neimark M, Connor J, Davila W. Air-charged and microtransducer urodynamic catheters in the evaluation of urethral function. Int Urogynecol J (2004) 15: 124-128. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  16. Homma Y. The clinical significance of urodynamic investigation in incontinence. BJU int, 2002, 90. 489-497. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  17. Observations on the function of the female urethra: III: An overview with special reference to the relation between urethral hypermobility and urethral incompetence Neurourology and Urodynamics Volume 23, Issue 1, 2004, Pages: 22-26. Go to PubMed...





Web časopisu Česká urologie je určen pouze pro lékaře a odborníky
z oblasti medicíny nebo farmacie.



Beru na vědomí, ľe informace zveřejněné na těchto stránkách
nejsou určeny pro laickou veřejnost.



Odejít Vstoupit