Aim. The aim of this article is to compare the values of measured (QMAX) and calculated (QMCLC) maximal urine flow and the values of measured (TQ) and calculated (TQCLC) time to reach maximal flow in a large group of individual uroflowgrams during home uroflowmetry.Materials and Methods. We analysed 29,110 individual uroflowgrams from 719 patients with prostate adenoma, aged 50 to 73 years (mean age, 60.5 ± 8.2 years), collected between 2004 and 2024. Two algorithms were used: determination of QMAX as the maximum value of the calculated flow (function extremum) and calculation of the actual value of the maximum flow after computer processing to eliminate interference and the WAG-effect (QMCLC).Results. The data showed the following differences between QMAX and QMCLC in the groups: 16.14 % for volumes up to 100 ml; 14.62 % for 100–200 ml; 13.75 % for 200–300 ml; 13.04 % for 300–400 ml; 14.25 % for 400–500 ml; 14.55 % for 500–600 ml; and 12.65 % for 600+ ml. For TQ and TQCLC values, the group differences were as follows: 3.49 % for volumes up to 100 mL; 2.27 % for 100–200 mL; 0.71 % for 200–300 mL; 0.97 % for 300–400 mL; 0.91 % for 400–500 mL; 3.51 % for 500–600 mL; and 1.51 % for 600+ mL.Conclusion. The study demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the maximum urine flow (QMAX) values obtained during measurement and the maximum urine flow value, after removing interference and the WAG effect (QMCLS) characteristic of any recorded volumes. Therefore, the accuracy of the data obtained may differ depending on the algorithm of uroflowgram processing. No statistically significant difference was found between TQ and TQCLC parameters. The algorithm of uroflowgrams processing used in the Sigma and Urovest uroflowmetry hardware and software system ensures high accuracy in determining maximum flow values; Urovest, in particular, has demonstrated reliability in this regard. The average determined difference between the QMAX and QMCLC values at different volumes of urination is 14.14 %.
Read full abstract