Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of uroflow parameters in children with pure constipation versus constipation plus lower urinary tract symptoms.
Kalyoncu, Aybegüm; Thomas, David Terence; Abdullayev, Tural; Kaynak, Ayten; Kastarli, Cansu; Mazican, Mustafa; Dagli, Tolga E; Tugtepe, Halil.
Afiliação
  • Kalyoncu A; a 1 Department of Pediatric Surgery, Marmara University School of Medicine , Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Thomas DT; b 2 Department of Pediatric Surgery, Pendik State Hospital , Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Abdullayev T; a 1 Department of Pediatric Surgery, Marmara University School of Medicine , Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Kaynak A; c 3 Pediatric Urodynamics & Biofeedback Unit, Division of Pediatric Urology, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Marmara University School of Medicine , Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Kastarli C; c 3 Pediatric Urodynamics & Biofeedback Unit, Division of Pediatric Urology, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Marmara University School of Medicine , Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Mazican M; d 4 Department of Radiology, Marmara University School of Medicine , Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Dagli TE; e 5 Division of Pediatric Urology, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Marmara University School of Medicine , Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Tugtepe H; e 5 Division of Pediatric Urology, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Marmara University School of Medicine , Istanbul, Turkey.
Scand J Urol ; 49(6): 492-496, 2015 Dec.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26139342
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

The aim of this study was to compare uroflow parameters of patients with pure constipation against those with constipation plus lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) and a control group (no constipation). MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

During August 2012 to March 2014 three groups of patients were enrolled into the study group C (constipation only), group CL (LUTS plus constipation) and group N (control no constipation or LUTS). Dysfunctional elimination syndrome (DES) scores, uroflowmetry/electromyography (uroflow-EMG) findings, postvoiding residual urine (PVR) and rectal diameter were measured and compared between groups.

RESULTS:

Groups C, CL and N comprised 80, 100 and 30 patients, respectively. Average DES scores were 12.6, 18.7 and 4.9, respectively. Voided volume (as a percentage of expected bladder capacity) was 104%, 89% and 101%; and average maximum flow rate was 21.1 ml/s, 36.4 ml/s and 28.1 ml/s, respectively. Pelvic floor muscle activity during voiding was seen in 40.0%, 42.0% and 6.7% of patients in groups C, CL and N, respectively; and pathological PVR was seen in 26.3%, 55.0% and 3.3% of patients in the respective groups. Average rectal diameter was measured as 38.6 mm, 36.4 mm and 28.1 mm in groups C, CL and N, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

This study found that abnormal voiding parameters are present in patients with constipation even if LUTS are not present. Therefore, it is important that all patients presenting with constipation have their voiding function evaluated.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article