maximum urethral closure pressure
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

29
(FIVE YEARS 3)

H-INDEX

10
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zane Pilsetniece ◽  
Egils Vjaters

Aim — The aim of this study was to analyse how conventional urodynamic values differ between females with specific types of urinary incontinence (UI). Material and Methods — Cross-sectional study enrolled 666 females with UI. Based on patient history and questionnaires they were divided into three groups: stress (SUI), mixed (MixUI) and urgency (UUI). Physical investigation and urodynamics were performed. The continuous factors: age and urodynamic data were evaluated using Multinomial regression and ANOVA test using SUI, MixUI, UUI as outcome groups. Results — Analysing urodynamic parameters significant difference between at least two groups was shown by the cystometric capacity and maximum flow rate: both highest in the SUI group; residual urine, opening detrusor pressure, maximum urethral closure pressure at rest, functional urethral length at rest: all highest in the UUI group. Mainly all urodynamic data showed significant difference between SUI/UUI, and MixUI/UUI groups, while difference between SUI/MixUI were not significant. Conclusions — Most of urodynamic data for MixUI group patients do not differ from SUI group. UDS parameters like: maximum flow rate, residual urine, opening detrusor pressure, maximum urethral closure pressure at rest, functional urethral length at rest can help to distinguish SUI and MixUI groups from UUI group.


2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 1303-1309
Author(s):  
Imad Bentellis ◽  
Mehdi El-Akri ◽  
Juliette Hascoet ◽  
Quentin Alimi ◽  
Romain Mathieu ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 220 (3) ◽  
pp. S738-S739
Author(s):  
R. Yoon ◽  
A. Futterman ◽  
E. Wegleitner ◽  
S.C. Wood ◽  
D.K. Veronikis

2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 1320-1324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kjartan Moe ◽  
Hjalmar A. Schiøtz ◽  
Sigurd Kulseng-Hanssen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document