Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct;44(5):1034-1039.
doi: 10.1177/0300060516657700. Epub 2016 Sep 27.

Impact of urethral catheterization on uroflow during pressure-flow study

Bi Song Zhu  1 , Hui Chuan Jiang  1 , Yuan Li  1
Affiliations

Impact of urethral catheterization on uroflow during pressure-flow study

Bi Song Zhu et al. J Int Med Res. 2016 Oct.

Abstract

Objective To investigate the impact of urethral catheterization on uroflow by comparing urodynamic parameters of free uroflowmetry versus pressure-flow study in adult patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia, female stress incontinence, lumbosacral spinal injury or spina bifida. Methods Each patient was required to perform pressure-flow study immediately following free uroflowmetry. Maximum flow rate (Qmax), average flow rate (Qave), voided volume (VV), Tmax (time to Qmax) and post-voiding residual urine (PVR) were compared between the two tests. Results Out of 120 patients, transurethral catheterization significantly impacted uroflow. In male patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia ( n = 50), Qmax, Qave and Tmax were significantly different between free uroflow and pressure-flow study. In patients with female stress incontinence ( n = 30), there were no statistically significant between-test differences in VV and Tmax, but Qmax, Qave and PVR were significantly different. In patients with spinal injury or spina bifida ( n = 40), Qmax, Qave and VV were significantly different between free uroflow and pressure-flow study. Conclusion Urethral catheterization adversely impacts uroflow in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia, female stress incontinence, spinal injury or spina bifida. Free uroflowmetry should be performed before pressure-flow study.

Keywords: Urodynamics; catheterization; uroflowmetry.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Schäfer W, Abrams P, Liao L, et al. Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry, and pressure-flow studies. Neurourol Urodyn 2002; 21: 261–274. - PubMed
    1. Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, et al. The standardisation of terminology in lower urinary tract function: report from the standardisation sub-committee of the international continence society. Urology 2003; 61: 37–49. - PubMed
    1. Klingler HC, Madersbacher S, Schmidbauer CP. Impact of different sized catheters on pressure-flow studies in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Neurourol Urodyn 1996; 15: 473–481. - PubMed
    1. Sharma AK, Poonawala A, Girish GN, et al. A quantitative comparison between free uroflow variables and urodynamic data, and the effect of the size of urodynamic catheters on its interpretation. Arab J Urol 2013; 11: 340–343. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Richard P, Ordonez NI, Tu le M. The effect of a 6 Fr catheter on flow rate in men. Urol Ann 2013; 5: 264–268. - PMC - PubMed