Premium
Urodynamic parameters in patients with slight and severe genuine stress incontinence: Is the stress profile useful?
Author(s) -
Meyer S.,
De Grandi P.,
Schmidt N.,
Sanzeni W.,
Spinosa J. P.
Publication year - 1994
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.1930130104
Subject(s) - supine position , medicine , stress incontinence , nuclear medicine , urology , urinary incontinence
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 I) 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 H 2 O ± 23/47 cm H 2 O ± 20 [P:0.3]; standing: 45 cm H 2 O ± 21/38 cm H 2 O ± 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 mm 2 ± 497/246 mm 2 ± 268 [ P < 0.009]; standing: 500 mm 2 ± 534/271 mm 2 ± 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 ] < 0.011) 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. © 1994 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.