Suppr超能文献

轻度和重度真性压力性尿失禁患者的尿动力学参数:压力曲线是否有用?

Urodynamic parameters in patients with slight and severe genuine stress incontinence: is the stress profile useful?

作者信息

Meyer S, De Grandi P, Schmidt N, Sanzeni W, Spinosa J P

机构信息

Urodynamic Unit, CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland.

出版信息

Neurourol Urodyn. 1994;13(1):21-8. doi: 10.1002/nau.1930130104.

Abstract

This study evaluates the usefulness of the urethral pressure profile (UPP) parameters in assessing the severity of genuine stress incontinence (GSI). Functional length (FL), maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP), pressure transmission ratio (PTR), residual area at stress (RAS), number of patients with incontinent spikes (IS), and distribution of IS on UPP were determined in supine and standing position for 54 patients (group 1) with a 1-hour pad test < 2 g and compared with the values of 63 patients (group 2) with a 1-hour pad test > 2 g. The results were similar: FL (supine: 24 mm +/- 6/26 mm +/- 7 [P:0.2]; standing: 26 mm +/- 8/24 mm +/- 11 [P:0.5]); MUCP (supine: 51 cm H2O +/- 23/47 cm H2O +/- 20 [P:0.3]; standing: 45 cm H2O +/- 21/38 cm H2O +/- 18 [P:0.1]); and PTR (supine: 83% +/- 27/84% +/- 31 [P:0.9]; standing: 81% +/- 25 and 88% +/- 27 [P:0.3]). But the RAS was lower (supine: 502 mm2 +/- 497/246 mm2 +/- 268 [P < 0.009]; standing: 500 mm2 +/- 534/271 mm2 +/- 306 [P < 0.05]) in group 2. If the percentage of patients with IS was higher (supine: 57/93% [P < 0.001]; standing: 54/84% [P < 0.01]) in group 2, the distribution of IS over the entire FL demonstrated no differences between group 1 and 2. In conclusion, except for the RAS, standard UPP parameters cannot be considered determinant in assessing the severity of GSI.

摘要

本研究评估尿道压力分布图(UPP)参数在评估真性压力性尿失禁(GSI)严重程度方面的作用。对54例1小时护垫试验<2g的患者(第1组)仰卧位和站立位的功能长度(FL)、最大尿道闭合压(MUCP)、压力传递率(PTR)、应力下残余面积(RAS)、出现失禁波峰(IS)的患者数量以及UPP上IS的分布进行了测定,并与63例1小时护垫试验>2g的患者(第2组)的值进行比较。结果相似:FL(仰卧位:24mm±6/26mm±7[P:0.2];站立位:26mm±8/24mm±11[P:0.5]);MUCP(仰卧位:51cmH₂O±23/47cmH₂O±20[P:0.3];站立位:45cmH₂O±21/38cmH₂O±18[P:0.1]);以及PTR(仰卧位:83%±27/84%±31[P:0.9];站立位:81%±25和88%±27[P:0.3])。但第2组的RAS较低(仰卧位:502mm²±497/246mm²±268[P<0.009];站立位:500mm²±534/271mm²±306[P<0.05])。如果第2组出现IS的患者百分比更高(仰卧位:57/93%[P<0.001];站立位:54/84%[P<0.01]),则整个FL上IS的分布在第1组和第2组之间无差异。总之,除RAS外,标准UPP参数在评估GSI严重程度时不能被视为决定性因素。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验