Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

Are conventional pressure-flow measurements dependent upon filled volume?

Lookup NU author(s): Rob Pickard


Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.


OBJECTIVE: To determine, in a prospective study, whether detrusor pressure (pdet.Qmax) and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) measurements obtained after filling to maximum cystometric capacity (MCC) differ from those obtained with filling restricted to average voided volume (V void), as standard protocols for pressure flow studies (PFS) mandate bladder filling until the subject has a strong desire to void, which aids standardization but further divorces the test from real-life experience. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After calculating the appropriate sample size, 84 patients attending for PFS with an adequately completed 3-day frequency-volume chart were recruited. Each underwent two consecutive PFS with filling to MCC and average Vvoid in a random order, and measurements of p det.Qmax and Qmax were compared. For men, the agreement for a diagnosis of obstruction between the tests was also assessed. RESULTS: Complete data were obtained from 76 (90%) of the patients, with a mean (range) age of 64 (20-94) years. The mean (SD) difference between MCC and average V void was 134 (113) mL (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences between estimates of Qmax, at -0.1 (3) mL/s (P = 0.75), and of pdet.Qmax, at -1 (13) CmH2O (P = 0.91), obtained within each patient. For men there was 91% agreement (32 of 35) in the classification of obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Restriction of filling to the average Vvoid during PFS allows a closer approximation to normal voiding and results in no clinically relevant change to the value of standard pressure-flow measurements or alters individual classification of obstruction. © 2005 BJU International.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Sahadevan K, Leonard AS, Pickard RS

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: BJU International

Year: 2005

Volume: 96

Issue: 3

Pages: 345-349

Print publication date: 01/08/2005

ISSN (print): 14644096

ISSN (electronic): 1464-410X

Publisher: Wiley


DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2005.05629.x

PubMed id: 16042728


Altmetrics provided by Altmetric