Advertisement

The 9 “C’s” of Pressure-Flow Urodynamics

  • Kelly C. Johnson
  • Eric S. RovnerEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Proper reading and interpretation of a pressure-flow urodynamic tracing should proceed in an orderly and organized fashion. Unfortunately, such a systematic approach to the interpretation of a pressure-flow urodynamic study does not currently exist. Using the functional classification of voiding dysfunction as a framework, the pressure-flow tracing can be dissected into a filling/storage portion and an emptying portion. Important aspects of the urodynamic study can be sub-classified within each of these phases. Conveniently, each of these aspects can be titled with a “C” thus providing the 9 “C’s” of pressure-flow urodynamics (PFUDs) interpretation. Such a scheme allows a complete and pragmatic approach to the interpretation of the urodynamic tracing.

Keywords

Lower Urinary Tract Symptom Bladder Outlet Obstruction Detrusor Contraction Bladder Pressure Bladder Filling 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Rovner ES, Wein AJ. Practical urodynamics: part I and II. Am Urol Assoc Update Ser. 2002;19:146–59.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wein A. Classification of neurogenic voiding dysfunction. J Urol. 1981;125:605–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haylen B, de Ridder D, Freeman RM, Swift SE, Berghmans B, Lee J, Monga A, Petri E, Rizk DE, Sand PK, Schaer GN. An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic floor dysfunction. Int Urogynecol J. 2010;21:5–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abrams P, Cardozo L, Fall M, Griffiths D, Rosier P, Ulmsten U, van Kerrebroeck P, Victor A, Wein A. The standardisation of lower urinary tract function: report from the Standardisation Subcommittee of the International Continence Society. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002;21:167–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    De Wachter S, Smith PP, Tannenbaum C, Van Koeveringe G, Drake M, Wyndaele JJ, Chapple C. How should bladder sensation be measured? ICI-RS 2011. Neurourol Urodyn. 2012;31(3):370–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rosier PFWM, Kuo H-C, De Gennaro M. Urodynamic testing. In: Abrams P, Cardozo Khoury A, Wein A, editors. Incontinence. 5th ed. ICUD-EAU Publishing; 2013;429–506.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schafer W. Analysis of bladder outlet function with the linearized passive urethral resistance relation, linPURR, and a disease-specific approach for grading obstruction from complex to simple. World J Urol. 1995;13:47–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Abrams P. Bladder outlet obstruction index, bladder contractility index and bladder voiding efficiency: three simple indices to define bladder voiding function. BJU Int. 1999;84(1):14–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lim CS, Abrams P. The Abrams–Griffiths nomogram. World J Urol. 1995;13:34–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Akikwala TV, Fleischman N, Nitti VW. Comparison of diagnostic criteria for female bladder outlet obstruction. J Urol. 2006;176:2093–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of UrologyMedical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA

Personalised recommendations