Peter M Lotze | PubMed Health

PubMed2005

A comparison of external transducers and microtransducers in urodynamic studies of female patients.

The urodynamic catheter and its transducer play a significant role in the performance of good urodynamic studies. The fluid-filled (perfusion) catheter with its external strain gauge transducer and the microtransducer catheter with a transducer built directly into the catheter are the two most prevalent catheters used in urodynamic studies today. Either functions differently with regard to how pressures are measured during testing. Both are unique with regard to their requirements for handling and management during testing. Proper transducer calibration, maintenance of standardized reference levels, and attention to catheter zeroing procedures as outlined by the International Continence Society are vital to good study technique and quality testing results. When used in a manner consistent with the catheter's performance characteristics, study error is minimized and meaningful clinical data can be obtained.

Equipment Design↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Voiding function after a modified no-tension pubovaginal sling.

Voiding dysfunction following sling procedures for correction of genuine stress urinary incontinence (GSI) is a frequently reported complication. This study sought to determine if voiding dysfunction could be reduced by eliminating sling tension against the urethra. Participants were diagnosed with GSI and randomized to one of two surgical groups. One received a conventional suburethral sling and the other received a modified sling placed at the mid-urethra without tension. Voiding trials after surgery monitored for voiding dysfunction. Multichannel urodynamic studies were performed pre- and post-operatively. Cure rates for GSI were similar for the two groups (91.7 vs. 88.5%). The 27 patients in the modified group voided an average of 5 days earlier than the 21 patients in the conventional group. Conventional group patients were more likely to have urinary retention (125 vs. 49 cc, p=0.03). The modified group had a lesser change in average closure pressure following surgery. Results suggested a higher increase in urethral resistance in the conventional group (0.72 vs. 1.88 cm H2O ml(-2) sec2). No differences were seen in symptomatic urinary urgency or urge incontinence following surgery. This study demonstrated a no-tension sling at the mid-urethra to afford equivalent cure of GSI with significant reduction of voiding dysfunction.

Adult↗