Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Urethral pressure reflectometry, a novel technique for simultaneous recording of pressure and cross-sectional area in the prostatic urethra: Testing in men without bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{f15281a436de4064931ed8d19bbaad7b,
title = "Urethral pressure reflectometry, a novel technique for simultaneous recording of pressure and cross-sectional area in the prostatic urethra: Testing in men without bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms",
abstract = "Abstract Objective. Urethral pressure reflectometry (UPR) was introduced in 2005, for simultaneous measurement of pressure and cross-sectional area in the female urethra. It has shown to be more reproducible than conventional pressure measurement. Recently, it has been tested in the anal canal and the prostatic urethra. The primary aim of this study was to describe UPR in men without bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms. Material and methods. The study investigated 18 men, median age 59 (range 50-77) with UPR and pressure-flow analyses (PQ), the International Prostate Symptom Score and the Danish version of Prostate Symptom Score, flow rate, residual urine measurements, transrectal ultrasound, urethral pressure profilometry and visual analogue scale (Discomfort). UPR parameters measured were opening and closing pressure, opening and closing elastance and hysteresis, from the bladder neck to the sphincter region. Results. All UPR parameters increased significantly from the bladder neck to the sphincter region, except for the opening pressure between the prostate and the sphincter region. Seven men were obstructed according to PQ, but with no significant differences in any other standard urodynamic parameters. The hysteresis in the sphincter region was significantly lower in the obstructed group (p = 0.005). Discomfort was significantly lower with PQ compared to UPR (p = 0.04). Nine men had slight bleeding from the urethra during measurement with UPR. Conclusions. The increase in all parameters from the bladder neck to the sphincter region is consistent with previous studies measuring the same parameters. The hysteresis may explain why seven men were obstructed according to PQ.",
author = "Mikael Aagaard and Niels Klarskov and Jens S{\o}nksen and Per Bagi and Gunnar Lose",
year = "2014",
month = apr,
doi = "10.3109/21681805.2013.831946",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "195--202",
journal = "Scandinavian Journal of Urology",
issn = "2168-1805",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Urethral pressure reflectometry, a novel technique for simultaneous recording of pressure and cross-sectional area in the prostatic urethra

T2 - Testing in men without bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms

AU - Aagaard, Mikael

AU - Klarskov, Niels

AU - Sønksen, Jens

AU - Bagi, Per

AU - Lose, Gunnar

PY - 2014/4

Y1 - 2014/4

N2 - Abstract Objective. Urethral pressure reflectometry (UPR) was introduced in 2005, for simultaneous measurement of pressure and cross-sectional area in the female urethra. It has shown to be more reproducible than conventional pressure measurement. Recently, it has been tested in the anal canal and the prostatic urethra. The primary aim of this study was to describe UPR in men without bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms. Material and methods. The study investigated 18 men, median age 59 (range 50-77) with UPR and pressure-flow analyses (PQ), the International Prostate Symptom Score and the Danish version of Prostate Symptom Score, flow rate, residual urine measurements, transrectal ultrasound, urethral pressure profilometry and visual analogue scale (Discomfort). UPR parameters measured were opening and closing pressure, opening and closing elastance and hysteresis, from the bladder neck to the sphincter region. Results. All UPR parameters increased significantly from the bladder neck to the sphincter region, except for the opening pressure between the prostate and the sphincter region. Seven men were obstructed according to PQ, but with no significant differences in any other standard urodynamic parameters. The hysteresis in the sphincter region was significantly lower in the obstructed group (p = 0.005). Discomfort was significantly lower with PQ compared to UPR (p = 0.04). Nine men had slight bleeding from the urethra during measurement with UPR. Conclusions. The increase in all parameters from the bladder neck to the sphincter region is consistent with previous studies measuring the same parameters. The hysteresis may explain why seven men were obstructed according to PQ.

AB - Abstract Objective. Urethral pressure reflectometry (UPR) was introduced in 2005, for simultaneous measurement of pressure and cross-sectional area in the female urethra. It has shown to be more reproducible than conventional pressure measurement. Recently, it has been tested in the anal canal and the prostatic urethra. The primary aim of this study was to describe UPR in men without bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms. Material and methods. The study investigated 18 men, median age 59 (range 50-77) with UPR and pressure-flow analyses (PQ), the International Prostate Symptom Score and the Danish version of Prostate Symptom Score, flow rate, residual urine measurements, transrectal ultrasound, urethral pressure profilometry and visual analogue scale (Discomfort). UPR parameters measured were opening and closing pressure, opening and closing elastance and hysteresis, from the bladder neck to the sphincter region. Results. All UPR parameters increased significantly from the bladder neck to the sphincter region, except for the opening pressure between the prostate and the sphincter region. Seven men were obstructed according to PQ, but with no significant differences in any other standard urodynamic parameters. The hysteresis in the sphincter region was significantly lower in the obstructed group (p = 0.005). Discomfort was significantly lower with PQ compared to UPR (p = 0.04). Nine men had slight bleeding from the urethra during measurement with UPR. Conclusions. The increase in all parameters from the bladder neck to the sphincter region is consistent with previous studies measuring the same parameters. The hysteresis may explain why seven men were obstructed according to PQ.

U2 - 10.3109/21681805.2013.831946

DO - 10.3109/21681805.2013.831946

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 23971742

VL - 48

SP - 195

EP - 202

JO - Scandinavian Journal of Urology

JF - Scandinavian Journal of Urology

SN - 2168-1805

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 38986667