首页> 外文期刊>Neurourology and urodynamics. >No primary role of ambulatory urodynamics for the management of spinal cord injury patients compared to conventional urodynamics.
【24h】

No primary role of ambulatory urodynamics for the management of spinal cord injury patients compared to conventional urodynamics.

机译:与常规尿动力学相比,动态尿动力学在处理脊髓损伤患者中没有主要作用。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIMS: Adequate urodynamic assessment of bladder behavior is essential in spinal cord injury (SCI) patients. Ambulatory urodynamics are more sensitive to detect detrusor overactivity (DO) than conventional urodynamics. The primary objective of this study was to determine the value of ambulatory urodynamics for the diagnosis of DO in SCI patients compared to conventional urodynamics. METHODS: Twenty-seven SCI patients who were suspected of DO underwent both conventional and ambulatory urodynamics at one day. A single involuntary detrusor contraction (IDC) was defined as a detrusor pressure rise of at least 10 cmH(2)O. DO according to the ICS definition was used in addition to minimize the influence of catheter artifacts. Outcome of urodynamics was used for decisions on treatment. RESULTS: Ambulatory urodynamics were more sensitive to diagnose IDC and DO. Conventional urodynamics had a sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 75% for DO diagnosis compared to ambulatory urodynamics. Mean maximum detrusor pressures did not differ significantly between both urodynamics. When the maximum detrusor pressure at conventional urodynamics did not exceed 40 cmH(2)O, 83% (10/12) of patients had a mean maximum detrusor pressure under 40 cmH(2)O at ambulatory urodynamics. Although the inter-individual DO diagnostic agreement was lower for ambulatory than conventional urodynamics (58%, K = 0.201 vs. 77%, K = 0552), the treatment agreement was higher for ambulatory urodynamics (58% vs. 42%). CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory urodynamics do not seem necessary for diagnosis and risk assessment in SCI patients suspected for DO when conventional urodynamics are done properly. The exact role of urodynamics in treatment decision remains to be determined.
机译:目的:对脊髓损伤(SCI)患者,膀胱行为的充分尿动力学评估至关重要。动态尿动力学比常规尿动力学对检测逼尿肌过度活动(DO)更敏感。这项研究的主要目的是确定与常规尿流动力学相比,动态尿流动力学对SCI患者DO的诊断价值。方法:27名怀疑是DO的SCI患者在一天中同时接受常规尿流动力学和动态尿流动力学检查。单个非自愿逼尿肌收缩(IDC)被定义为逼尿肌压力升高至少10 cmH(2)O。除了使导管伪影的影响最小之外,还使用了根据ICS定义的DO。尿动力学的结果用于治疗决策。结果:动态尿流动力学诊断IDC和DO更敏感。与动态尿流动力学相比,常规尿流动力学对DO诊断的敏感性为82%,特异性为75%。在两个尿动力学之间,平均最大逼尿肌压力没有显着差异。当常规尿流动力学的最大逼尿肌压力不超过40 cmH(2)O时,有83%(10/12)的患者在非尿路动力学时的平均最大逼尿肌压力低于40 cmH(2)O。尽管非卧床的个体间DO诊断协议低于常规尿动力学(58%,K = 0.201 vs. 77%,K = 0552),但非卧床尿动力学的治疗协议较高(58%vs. 42%)。结论:在常规尿动力学检查正确完成的情况下,对于怀疑为DO的SCI患者,动态尿动力学检查对于诊断和风险评估似乎不是必需的。尿动力学在治疗决策中的确切作用尚待确定。

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