Pressure-flow studies in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia:a study comparing suprapubic and transurethral methods  

作　　者：Shan-Chao Zhao Shao-Bin Zheng Wan-Long Tan Peng Zhang Huan Qi 

机构地区：[1]Department of Urology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China

出　　处：《Asian Journal of Andrology》2006年第6期731-735,共5页亚洲男性学杂志（英文版）

摘　　要：Aim： To compare the use of the suprapubic puncture method versus the transurethral method in pressure-flow studies in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods： Twenty-three men with benign prostatic hyperplasia underwent both suprapubic and transurethral pressure-flow studies during a single session. Standard pressure-flow variables were recorded in all patients with both methods, enabling calculation of obstruction using commonly used grading systems, such as the urethral resistance algorithm, the Abrams-Griffith （AG） number and the Schaefer linear nomogram. Results： There were statistically significant differences between the methods in the mean values of maximum flow rate （P 〈 0.05）, detrusor pressure at the maximum flow （P 〈 0.01）, urethral resistance algorithm （P 〈 0.01）, AG number （P 〈 0.01） and maximum cystic capacity （P 〈 0.01）. Of the men in the study, 10 （43.5%） remained in the same Schaefer class with both methods and 18 （78.3%） in the same AG number area. Using the transurethral method, 12 （52.2%） men increased their Schaefer class by one and 1 （4.3%） by two. There were also differences between the suprapubic and transurethral methods using the AG number： 4 （17.4%） men moved from a classification of equivocal to obstructed and 1 （4.3%） from unobstructed to equivocal. Conclusion： The differences between the techniques for measuring intravesical pressure alter the grading of obstruction determined by several of the commonly used classifications. An 8 F transurethral catheter significantly increases the likelihood of a diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction when compared with the suprapubic method.Aim： To compare the use of the suprapubic puncture method versus the transurethral method in pressure-flow studies in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods： Twenty-three men with benign prostatic hyperplasia underwent both suprapubic and transurethral pressure-flow studies during a single session. Standard pressure-flow variables were recorded in all patients with both methods, enabling calculation of obstruction using commonly used grading systems, such as the urethral resistance algorithm, the Abrams-Griffith （AG） number and the Schaefer linear nomogram. Results： There were statistically significant differences between the methods in the mean values of maximum flow rate （P 〈 0.05）, detrusor pressure at the maximum flow （P 〈 0.01）, urethral resistance algorithm （P 〈 0.01）, AG number （P 〈 0.01） and maximum cystic capacity （P 〈 0.01）. Of the men in the study, 10 （43.5%） remained in the same Schaefer class with both methods and 18 （78.3%） in the same AG number area. Using the transurethral method, 12 （52.2%） men increased their Schaefer class by one and 1 （4.3%） by two. There were also differences between the suprapubic and transurethral methods using the AG number： 4 （17.4%） men moved from a classification of equivocal to obstructed and 1 （4.3%） from unobstructed to equivocal. Conclusion： The differences between the techniques for measuring intravesical pressure alter the grading of obstruction determined by several of the commonly used classifications. An 8 F transurethral catheter significantly increases the likelihood of a diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction when compared with the suprapubic method.

关 键 词：URODYNAMICS pressure-flow study SUPRAPUBIC TRANSURETHRAL benign prostatic hyperplasia bladder outlet obstruction 

分 类 号：R697.3[医药卫生—泌尿科学]