Voiding efficiency in children is significantly impaired by the presence of the urethral catheter during pressure-flow studies.
Pressure-flow studies
Urethral catheterization
Urodynamics
Uroflowmetry
Voiding dysfunction
Voiding efficiency
Journal
Journal of pediatric urology
ISSN: 1873-4898
Titre abrégé: J Pediatr Urol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101233150
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2023
10 2023
Historique:
received:
17
01
2023
revised:
30
06
2023
accepted:
07
07
2023
medline:
2
10
2023
pubmed:
8
8
2023
entrez:
7
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Little is known about the effect of catheterization during pressure-flow studies (PFS) on voiding efficiency in children. Our objective was to determine the effect of urethral catheterization on Qmax and flow index (FI) during PFS compared to the free flow of uroflowmetry (UF). We retrospectively reviewed 63 consecutive children who underwent UF and PFS at our center on the same day (2019-2022). Voiding data was available for 46 patients. Patients first underwent a UF with full bladder, then PFS after urethral catheter insertion. Patients with urethral pathologies (n = 6), on clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) (n = 2) and with major comorbidities (n = 2) were excluded. Indications for UF/PFS were LUTS, recurrent UTIs, incontinence or neurosurgical pre-operative evaluation. Data was collected from the UF and the PFS and compared using paired t-test. The idealized Qmax and flow index (FI) were calculated for UF and PFS using the formulas described by Franco et al.: Male Qmax = 11.26 + 0.0701(TBC [total bladder capacity]) - 0.0000513(TBC); Female Qmax = 10.723 + 0.073(TBC) - 0.0000423(TBC), FI = Actual Qmax/Expected Qmax (Franco and et al., 2016; Franco et al., 2018; Franco and et al., 2016). Median age was 7 years old (IQR 5-11). Twenty-one (40%) patients were male and 32 (60%) patients were female. Of the 53 patients, 3 boys and 4 girls (n = 7; 13%) were unable to void with the catheter in place during PFS but able to void after its removal. Of the remaining 46 cases, the Qmax during PFS was 5 mL/s slower than the Qmax recorded on the UF without catheter, representing a decrease of 29% (12.3 vs 17.3 mL/s; p < 0.0001). The impact of urethral catheter during PFS was more important in males vs females (Qmax decreased by 7.7 vs 3.3 mL/s, or 45 vs 19%). The mean FI during PFS was 44%, which was a 30% reduction compared to the 74% FI obtained with UF (p < 0.00001). In males, the FI decreased by 37% on PFS, whereas it decreased 26% in females, similar to the Qmax decrease. Voiding efficiency, as assessed by Qmax and FI, is decreased during PFS compared to uroflow studies. Our data documents for the first time the impact of urethral catheterization on pediatric voiding efficiency. Abnormal flow rates and elevated PVRs should be used to guide patient management only if obtained by uroflow. Prospective validation comparing free flow with PFS studies will help characterize the impact of urethral catheter relative to bladder pathology, age, gender and catheter size used.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Little is known about the effect of catheterization during pressure-flow studies (PFS) on voiding efficiency in children. Our objective was to determine the effect of urethral catheterization on Qmax and flow index (FI) during PFS compared to the free flow of uroflowmetry (UF).
METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed 63 consecutive children who underwent UF and PFS at our center on the same day (2019-2022). Voiding data was available for 46 patients. Patients first underwent a UF with full bladder, then PFS after urethral catheter insertion. Patients with urethral pathologies (n = 6), on clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) (n = 2) and with major comorbidities (n = 2) were excluded. Indications for UF/PFS were LUTS, recurrent UTIs, incontinence or neurosurgical pre-operative evaluation. Data was collected from the UF and the PFS and compared using paired t-test. The idealized Qmax and flow index (FI) were calculated for UF and PFS using the formulas described by Franco et al.: Male Qmax = 11.26 + 0.0701(TBC [total bladder capacity]) - 0.0000513(TBC); Female Qmax = 10.723 + 0.073(TBC) - 0.0000423(TBC), FI = Actual Qmax/Expected Qmax (Franco and et al., 2016; Franco et al., 2018; Franco and et al., 2016).
RESULTS
Median age was 7 years old (IQR 5-11). Twenty-one (40%) patients were male and 32 (60%) patients were female. Of the 53 patients, 3 boys and 4 girls (n = 7; 13%) were unable to void with the catheter in place during PFS but able to void after its removal. Of the remaining 46 cases, the Qmax during PFS was 5 mL/s slower than the Qmax recorded on the UF without catheter, representing a decrease of 29% (12.3 vs 17.3 mL/s; p < 0.0001). The impact of urethral catheter during PFS was more important in males vs females (Qmax decreased by 7.7 vs 3.3 mL/s, or 45 vs 19%). The mean FI during PFS was 44%, which was a 30% reduction compared to the 74% FI obtained with UF (p < 0.00001). In males, the FI decreased by 37% on PFS, whereas it decreased 26% in females, similar to the Qmax decrease.
CONCLUSIONS
Voiding efficiency, as assessed by Qmax and FI, is decreased during PFS compared to uroflow studies. Our data documents for the first time the impact of urethral catheterization on pediatric voiding efficiency. Abnormal flow rates and elevated PVRs should be used to guide patient management only if obtained by uroflow. Prospective validation comparing free flow with PFS studies will help characterize the impact of urethral catheter relative to bladder pathology, age, gender and catheter size used.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37550095
pii: S1477-5131(23)00297-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2023.07.004
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
541.e1-541.e7Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Journal of Pediatric Urology Company. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of interest None.