Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Extramural Ambulatory Urodynamic Monitoring During Natural Filling and Normal Daily Activities: Evaluation of 100 Patients

1991; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 146; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/s0022-5347(17)37730-3

1527-3792

E.S.C. van Waalwijk van Doorn, August R. Remmers, R.A. Janknegt,

Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Management

No AccessJournal of Urology1 Jul 1991Extramural Ambulatory Urodynamic Monitoring During Natural Filling and Normal Daily Activities: Evaluation of 100 Patients E.S.C. van Waalwijk van Doorn, A. Remmers, and R.A. Janknegt E.S.C. van Waalwijk van DoornE.S.C. van Waalwijk van Doorn , A. RemmersA. Remmers , and R.A. JanknegtR.A. Janknegt View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(17)37730-3AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Conventional urodynamic tests are short and performed under nonphysiological circumstances. The introduction of ambulatory urodynamic tests is a promising improvement of our diagnostic abilities with respect to these disadvantages. To test the value of our ambulatory urodynamic method we evaluated 100 patients with urinary incontinence and/or voiding problems by both diagnostic methods. Pre-classification according to medical history was compared with the urodynamic diagnosis obtained from the conventional and extramural ambulatory monitoring methods, and the combination of both techniques in patients with urinary incontinence. The conventional method showed no abnormalities in 32% of the patients, compared to only 3% with the ambulatory method. The conventional method confirmed pre-classified stress incontinence in 36% of the patients, compared to only 14% by extramural ambulatory monitoring. Combining both methods, pre-classified stress incontinence was confirmed in 43% of the patients. Pre-classified urge incontinence was confirmed in 47%, 59% and 84%, and pre-classified mixed incontinence was confirmed in 23%, 29% and 55% of the patients using the conventional, extramural ambulatory monitoring and combination methods, respectively. An over-all correlation with the pre-classification in the incontinence group was found in 34% with the conventional method and 43% with extramural ambulatory monitoring. Combining both diagnostic tools showed a correlation with the pre-classification in 67% of the patients. These results show the promising impact of ambulatory urodynamic testing in the near future. © 1991 by The American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byWein A (2016) Re: Differentiation of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunctions: The Role of Ambulatory Urodynamic MonitoringJournal of Urology, VOL. 196, NO. 5, (1499-1503), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2016.VENHOLA M, REUNANEN M, TASKINEN S, LAHDES-VASAMA T and UHARI M (2018) Interobserver and Intra-Observer Agreement in Interpreting Urodynamic Measurements in ChildrenJournal of Urology, VOL. 169, NO. 6, (2344-2346), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2003.RADLEY S, ROSARIO D, CHAPPLE C and FARKAS A (2018) CONVENTIONAL AND AMBULATORY URODYNAMIC FINDINGS IN WOMEN WITH SYMPTOMS SUGGESTIVE OF BLADDER OVERACTIVITYJournal of Urology, VOL. 166, NO. 6, (2253-2258), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2001.van Waalwijk van Doorn E, Ambergen A and Janknegt R (2018) Detrusor Activity Index: Quantification of Detrusor Overactivity by Ambulatory MonitoringJournal of Urology, VOL. 157, NO. 2, (596-599), Online publication date: 1-Feb-1997. Volume 146Issue 1July 1991Page: 124-131 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 1991 by The American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Keywordsurinary tracturinary incontinenceurinationurodynamicsurethraMetrics Author Information E.S.C. van Waalwijk van Doorn More articles by this author A. Remmers More articles by this author R.A. Janknegt More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...