Cargando…

Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the lower urinary tract symptoms, classified by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), urodynamic results (Watts Factor (WF), Bladder Contractility Index (BCI), and post void residual (PVR), in order to differentiate Detrusor Underactivity (DU) from Bladder Outlet O...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kalil, Jefferson, D'Ancona, Carlos Arturo Levi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7088469/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32167707
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0402
_version_ 1783509543236403200
author Kalil, Jefferson
D'Ancona, Carlos Arturo Levi
author_facet Kalil, Jefferson
D'Ancona, Carlos Arturo Levi
author_sort Kalil, Jefferson
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the lower urinary tract symptoms, classified by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), urodynamic results (Watts Factor (WF), Bladder Contractility Index (BCI), and post void residual (PVR), in order to differentiate Detrusor Underactivity (DU) from Bladder Outlet Obstruction (BOO). METHODS: Retrospective observational study performed from 2011 to 2018 at the Hospital das Clínicas of Unicamp. Two phases were done: first, to estimate sample size, and second, to evaluate the predicted parameters. Male patients with range age from 40 to 80 years were included. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1, without BOO and with DU; Group 2, with BOO. Variables analyzed: age, comorbidities, symptoms, urodynamic data (BCI and WF) and PVR. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included in each group, with medians of 68 (Group 1) and 67.5 years old (Group 2) (p = 0.8416). There was no difference for comorbidities. In relation to IPSS, medians were: 16.5 and 20.5, respectively (p = 0.858). As for symptoms, there was predominance of combination of storage and voiding symptoms in the two groups (p = 0.1810). Regarding PVR, 15 patients in Group 1 and 16 in Group 2 presented PVR> 30mL (p = 0.7411). BCI presented median values of 75 and 755.50 for Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (p <0.0001), while WF had medians of 22.42 and 73.85 (p <0.0001). CONCLUSION: Isolated symptoms, classified by IPSS and PVR, could not differentiate patients with DU from those with BOO, but it was possible using urodynamic data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7088469
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70884692020-04-02 Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors Kalil, Jefferson D'Ancona, Carlos Arturo Levi Int Braz J Urol Original Article OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the lower urinary tract symptoms, classified by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), urodynamic results (Watts Factor (WF), Bladder Contractility Index (BCI), and post void residual (PVR), in order to differentiate Detrusor Underactivity (DU) from Bladder Outlet Obstruction (BOO). METHODS: Retrospective observational study performed from 2011 to 2018 at the Hospital das Clínicas of Unicamp. Two phases were done: first, to estimate sample size, and second, to evaluate the predicted parameters. Male patients with range age from 40 to 80 years were included. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1, without BOO and with DU; Group 2, with BOO. Variables analyzed: age, comorbidities, symptoms, urodynamic data (BCI and WF) and PVR. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included in each group, with medians of 68 (Group 1) and 67.5 years old (Group 2) (p = 0.8416). There was no difference for comorbidities. In relation to IPSS, medians were: 16.5 and 20.5, respectively (p = 0.858). As for symptoms, there was predominance of combination of storage and voiding symptoms in the two groups (p = 0.1810). Regarding PVR, 15 patients in Group 1 and 16 in Group 2 presented PVR> 30mL (p = 0.7411). BCI presented median values of 75 and 755.50 for Group 1 and Group 2, respectively (p <0.0001), while WF had medians of 22.42 and 73.85 (p <0.0001). CONCLUSION: Isolated symptoms, classified by IPSS and PVR, could not differentiate patients with DU from those with BOO, but it was possible using urodynamic data. Sociedade Brasileira de Urologia 2020-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7088469/ /pubmed/32167707 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0402 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kalil, Jefferson
D'Ancona, Carlos Arturo Levi
Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors
title Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors
title_full Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors
title_fullStr Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors
title_full_unstemmed Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors
title_short Detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors
title_sort detrusor underactivity versus bladder outlet obstruction clinical and urodynamic factors
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7088469/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32167707
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-5538.IBJU.2019.0402
work_keys_str_mv AT kaliljefferson detrusorunderactivityversusbladderoutletobstructionclinicalandurodynamicfactors
AT danconacarlosarturolevi detrusorunderactivityversusbladderoutletobstructionclinicalandurodynamicfactors