Premium
A comparison of the cough and standing urethral pressure profile in the diagnosis of stress incontinence
Author(s) -
Cadogan Mark,
Awad Said,
Field Christopher,
Acker Kelly,
Middleton Susan
Publication year - 1988
Publication title -
neurourology and urodynamics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.918
H-Index - 90
eISSN - 1520-6777
pISSN - 0733-2467
DOI - 10.1002/nau.1930070403
Subject(s) - supine position , medicine , urinary incontinence , cystoscopy , cutoff , urology , stress incontinence , surgery , urinary system , physics , quantum mechanics
Controversy over the accuracy of the urethral pressure profile (UPP) and its role in the diagnosis of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is unresolved. Different UPP methods and techniques have been introduced. In this study, we examined 78 female patients with mixed symptoms of stress and urge incontinence. Each had a history, physical examination, cystoscopy, and urodynamic assessment, which consisted of a cystometrogram (CMG), UPP (supine and standing), and “cough profile” by the Brown and Wickham (BW) method and also UPP (supine) and “cough profile” with the microtip transducer (MTT). The final diagnosis in 38 patients was SUI (group I) and in 40 patients, no SUI (group II). The maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) supine and standing was significantly lower in group I, but there was no significant difference between the two groups in the transmission index (TI) of the “cough profile.” MUCP standing showed the least overlap between the two groups, and with a cutoff point at 40 cm H 2 O, the overall diagnostic accuracy was 69%, with 39% sensitivity and 98% specificity. By combining MUCP supine and standing and using cutoff points at 40 cm H 2 O and 35 cm H 2 O, respectively, the overall diagnostic accuracy was 72%, with 47% sensitivity and 95% specificity. We believe that the UPP is a useful ancillary tool in the assessment of complicated cases of urinary incontinence in the female.