首页> 外文期刊>Urology >Uroflowmetric differences between standing and sitting positions for men used to void in the sitting position.
【24h】

Uroflowmetric differences between standing and sitting positions for men used to void in the sitting position.

机译:男性在站立姿势和坐姿之间的尿流率差异通常会导致坐姿无效。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

OBJECTIVES: To compare the results of uroflowmetry in the standing and sitting position in men who void only in the sitting position. METHODS: Two hundred patients were subjected to pelvic ultrasonography while their bladders were full, and then after voiding. Uroflowmetry was done both in sitting and standing positions and compared for all patients. Further comparisons were made according to patients' age (below and above 50) and Qmax (at or below 15 mL per second versus greater than 15 mL per second). We performed statistical analysis using Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test. RESULTS: Comparison of uroflowmetric results in both positions showed no statistical differences except for significantly larger residual urine volume in the standing position (86.1 +/- 77) relative to the sitting position (73 +/- 80.2) (P = 0.04). On substratifying patients according to age, Qmax was significantly higher in the sitting position (16.6 +/- 8.94) relative to the standing position (15.2 +/- 7.5) in the young group (P = 0.02). Such a significant difference was not seen in the elder (greater than 50 years) group. In contrary to the low-flow group, cases with high flow showed significantly higher Qmax and Qave and significantly lower voiding and flow times and significantly lower residual urine volume in the sitting position. CONCLUSIONS: Voiding in the sitting position showed significantly better flow rates than during standing in patients with higher flow and younger age. Moreover, postvoid residual was significantly less in the sitting position in the previous two groups and in the total groups of patients. On the contrary, the presence of low flow nullifies these uroflowmetric positional differences. Uroflowmetry should be always performed in the preferred position.
机译:目的:比较仅在坐位时无效的男性在站立和坐位时的尿流测量结果。方法:200例患者在膀胱充满时进行了骨盆超声检查,然后排空。在坐位和站立位均进行尿流测定,并比较所有患者。根据患者的年龄(50岁以下和50岁以上)和Qmax(每秒15毫升或以下,而每秒大于15毫升)进行进一步比较。我们使用Wilcoxon配对配对符号秩检验进行了统计分析。结果:两个位置的尿流测量结果比较均无统计学差异,除了站立位置(73 +/- 80.2)相对于坐位(73 +/- 80.2)明显更大的残余尿量(P = 0.04)。在按年龄分层的患者中,青年组的坐姿(16.6 +/- 8.94)Qmax显着高于站立姿势(15.2 +/- 7.5)(P = 0.02)。在老年(大于50岁)组中未观察到这种显着差异。与低流量组相反,高流量组的病人表现出更高的Qmax和Qave以及明显减少的排尿和流动时间,并且坐位的剩余尿量明显减少。结论:对于坐立不坐的人,流速较高和较年轻的病人的站立时流速要比站立时好得多。此外,在前两组和全部患者组中,坐位后的术后残留量均明显减少。相反,低流量的存在使这些尿流测量位置差无效。尿流率测定应始终在首选位置进行。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号