Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Surgical treatment of detrusor underactivity: a short term proof of concept study
Blaivas, Jerry G; Forde, James C; Davila, Jonathan L; Policastro, Lucas; Tyler, Michael; Aizen, Joshua; Badri, Anand; Purohit, Rajveer S; Weiss, Jeffrey P.
Affiliation
  • Blaivas, Jerry G; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Forde, James C; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Davila, Jonathan L; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Policastro, Lucas; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Tyler, Michael; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Aizen, Joshua; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Badri, Anand; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Purohit, Rajveer S; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
  • Weiss, Jeffrey P; Cornell University. Weill Medical College. Department of Urology. New York. US
Int. braz. j. urol ; 43(3): 540-548, May.-June 2017. tab, graf
Article de En | LILACS | ID: biblio-840848
Bibliothèque responsable: BR1.1
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objectives To compare the surgical outcomes of men with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) due to benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) to those with detrusor underactivity (DU) or acontractile detrusor (DA). Materials and Methods This retrospective, IRB approved study included men who underwent BPO surgery for refractory LUTS or urinary retention. Patients were grouped based on videourodynamic (VUDS)

findings:

1) men with BOO, 2) men with DU and 3) men with DA. The primary outcome measure was the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGII). Secondary outcome measures included uroflow (Qmax), post-void residual volume (PVR) and the need for clean intermittent catheterization (CIC). Results One hundred and nineteen patients were evaluated 1) 34 with BOO, 2) 62 with DU and 3) 23 with DA. Subjective success rate (PGII) was highest in the BOO group (97%) and those with DU (98%), while DA patients had a PGII success of 26%, (p<0.0001). After surgery, patients with BOO had the lowest PVR (68.5mL). Fifty-six patients (47%) performed CIC pre-operatively (47% of BOO, 32% of DU and 87% of DA patients). None of the patients in the BOO and DU groups required CIC post operatively compared to16/23 (69%) of patients in the DA group (p<0.0001). Conclusions BPO surgery is a viable treatment option in men with presumed BOO and DU while DA is a poor prognostic sign in men who do not void spontaneously pre-operatively.
Sujet(s)
Mots clés

Texte intégral: 1 Indice: LILACS Sujet Principal: Hyperplasie de la prostate / Obstruction du col de la vessie / Symptômes de l'appareil urinaire inférieur Type d'étude: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limites du sujet: Aged / Humans / Male langue: En Texte intégral: Int. braz. j. urol Thème du journal: UROLOGIA Année: 2017 Type: Article

Texte intégral: 1 Indice: LILACS Sujet Principal: Hyperplasie de la prostate / Obstruction du col de la vessie / Symptômes de l'appareil urinaire inférieur Type d'étude: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limites du sujet: Aged / Humans / Male langue: En Texte intégral: Int. braz. j. urol Thème du journal: UROLOGIA Année: 2017 Type: Article