You have accessJournal of UrologyUrodynamics/Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction/Female Pelvic Medicine: Incontinence: Evaluation (Urodynamic Testing)1 Apr 2016PD01-01 SIMILARITY ANALYSIS BETWEEN CATHETERLESS URODYNAMIC STUDY USING PENILE CUFF AND CONVENTIONAL URODYNAMIC STUDY FOR EVALUATION OF MALE LOWER URINARY TRACT SYMPTOM Sangrak Bae, Joonse Jung, Bonghee Park, Changhee Han, Sunghak Kang, and Yongseok Lee Sangrak BaeSangrak Bae More articles by this author , Joonse JungJoonse Jung More articles by this author , Bonghee ParkBonghee Park More articles by this author , Changhee HanChanghee Han More articles by this author , Sunghak KangSunghak Kang More articles by this author , and Yongseok LeeYongseok Lee More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.2021AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Various examination tools are used for evaluation of lower urinary tract function just like uroflowmetry, urodynamic study (UDS), questionnaire, and etc. Conventional UDS has some disadvantage such as long time for the test, pain or discomfort due to catheter insertion. The objective of this study is to identify similarity between catheterless UDS using penile cuff and conventional UDS. METHODS From October 2013 to May 2015, 30 patients who was diagnosed benign prostate hyperplasia, neurogenic bladder, prostate cancer and agree to examination were included in the study. All patients was done penile cuff UDS(CT3000) and conventional urodynamic study. Also, uroflowmetry, transrectal ultrasonography, urine analysis was done. Comparison of urodynamic results and penile cuff test results, ICS nomogram and Newcastle nomogram. RESULTS Mean age was 69.1 years old, mean BMI was 25.63 kg/m2. Mean prostate volume was 72.85cc and PSA was 12.04ng/dL. 24 patients were BPH, 2 patients were neurogenic bladder, and 4 patients were prostate cancer in later examination. In conventional UDS, 19 obstructive pattern, 3 equivocal, 4 unobstructive pattern, and 4 patients was failed to void. On cuff test, 18 obstructive, 3 unobstructive, 6 low pressure low flow, and 3 high pressure high flow were identified. 15 patients were same result on UDS and cuff test, 5 patients were similar results. 4 pateints who was failed voiding on UDS was low pressure low flow in cuff test and maximal cuss pressure were lower than 100mmHg. 6 patients were represented opposite result between UDS and cuff test. In detailed analysis, Qmax in pressure flow study and maximal intravesical pressure was highly correlated with Qmax in cuff test and Qmax in uroflowmetry.(R=0.829, 0.398, 0.374/ P<0.001, 0.036,0.042) maximal cuff pressure was correlated with Qmax in pressure flow study (R=0.443, P=0.018) CONCLUSIONS Penile cuff UDS represented 80 % of concordance in prediction of lower urinary tract function compared to conventional UDS. Especially, the patients who had ‘low pressure low flow’ in cuff test was also failed in voiding on conventional UDS, so it might be possible to predict bladder function indirectly. This results might be helpful in prediction of postoperative result on voiding after TUR-P or HoLEP and replaced conventional UDS. © 2016FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 4SApril 2016Page: e45 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016MetricsAuthor Information Sangrak Bae More articles by this author Joonse Jung More articles by this author Bonghee Park More articles by this author Changhee Han More articles by this author Sunghak Kang More articles by this author Yongseok Lee More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract