Mahfouz Wally, Al Afraa Tala, Campeau Lysanne, Corcos Jacques
Department of Urology, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Int Urogynecol J. 2012 Mar;23(3):269-77. doi: 10.1007/s00192-011-1585-y. Epub 2011 Oct 20.
This literature review, providing reference ranges of normal variability in urodynamic parameters, is the second part of a two-part article. The first part addresses non-invasive urodynamics (UDS), while the second part addresses invasive techniques.
Data were obtained through MEDLINE from articles published between January 1956 and February 2011, International Continence Society meeting abstracts, and standardization reports. Search terms included cystometry, urethral pressure profilometry, leak point pressure, video UDS, normal volunteer, pressure flow studies, and electromyography.
Normal values varied widely in the literature. However, with the help of clinical data, it was possible to define "normality" ranges for most of the different parameters.
Urodynamic evaluation of lower urinary tract (LUT) function is not a physiological test. However, it is still the best available tool for LUT function assessment. Even if normality in UDS can be defined, tests must always be interpreted against patient characteristics, complaints, and symptoms.
本综述旨在提供尿动力学参数正常变异的参考范围，是一篇分两部分的文章的第二部分。第一部分论述非侵入性尿动力学（UDS），第二部分论述侵入性技术。
通过MEDLINE获取1956年1月至2011年2月发表的文章、国际尿控协会会议摘要以及标准化报告中的数据。检索词包括膀胱测压、尿道压力描记法、漏点压力、影像尿动力学、正常志愿者、压力流研究以及肌电图。
文献中的正常值差异很大。然而，借助临床数据，有可能为大多数不同参数定义“正常”范围。
下尿路（LUT）功能的尿动力学评估并非生理测试。然而，它仍是评估LUT功能的最佳可用工具。即便可以定义UDS的正常范围，但测试结果仍须结合患者的特征、主诉和症状进行解读。
