Assessment of quality in urodynamics: Cough versus valsalva.
cough
quality
urodynamics
valsalva maneuver
Journal
Neurourology and urodynamics
ISSN: 1520-6777
Titre abrégé: Neurourol Urodyn
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8303326
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2021
04 2021
Historique:
revised:
26
02
2021
accepted:
08
03
2021
pubmed:
2
4
2021
medline:
25
2
2023
entrez:
1
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To ensure quality, the International Continence Society recommends asking the patient to cough every minute or 50 ml of infused volume. However, on occasions, it was noticed that if cough transmission was poor, Valsalva maneuvers could show pressure transmission was satisfactory. Hence, a study was designed to compare the two methods. Cough and Valsalva maneuver pressures were compared in 40 patients, 20 consecutive men and 20 consecutive women, undergoing urodynamics at three time points: baseline (20 ml filling), prevoid and postvoid. At baseline, the percentage difference between p Quality control during urodynamics is important to ensure diagnostic accuracy. This is the first study to compare two methods of quality control, coughs, and Valsalva maneuvers. Coughs are a useful indicator of pressure transmission quality at all time points throughout urodynamic studies. However, at low volumes, Valsalva maneuvers give a better indication of quality, with lower variability, whereas at cystometric capacity coughs performed better. Therefore, if poor pressure transmission occurs with cough during urodynamics, particularly at low volumes, it is recommended that a Valsalva maneuver is used to further assess whether pressure transmission and thus urodynamic quality is satisfactory.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1021-1026Informations de copyright
© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Sullivan J, Lewis P, Howell S, Williams T, Shepherd AM, Abrams P. Quality control in urodynamics: a review of urodynamic traces from one centre. BJU Int. 2003;91(3):201-207.
Rosier PFWM, Schaefer W, Lose G, et al. International Continence Society Good Urodynamic Practices and Terms 2016: urodynamics, uroflowmetry, cystometry, and pressure-flow study. Neurourol Urodyn. 2017;36(5):1243-1260.
Raz O, Tse V, Chan L. Urodynamic testing: physiological background, setting-up, calibration and artefacts. BJU Int. 2014;114(Suppl 1):22-28.
Gammie A, Clarkson B, Constantinou C, et al. International Continence Society guidelines on urodynamic equipment performance. Neurourol Urodyn. 2014;33(4):370-379.
Abrams P. Urodynamics. 3rd ed. London, UK: Springer-Verlag; 2006.
Gammie A, Hogan S, Abrams P. #618 The Assessment of Pressure Transmission. International Continence Society 2012. Beijing, China: International Continence Society; 2012.
Looga R. The Valsalva manoeuvre-cardiovascular effects and performance technique: a critical review. Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2005;147(1):39-49.