Study of female urinary incontinence with single channel urodynamics: Comparison of the symptoms on admission. Analysis of 590 females;Estudio de la incontinencia de orina femenina mediante urodinamia monocanal: Comparación con los síntomas de ingreso. Análisis de 590 mujeres

Archivos Espanoles de Urologia

Volumn 62, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 115-123

  Arrióla, Paolo Ricci ^a   Dalenz, Vicente Solá ^a   Schanz, Jack Pardo ^a  

^a CLÍNICA LAS CONDES   (Chile)

Author keywords

Non multichannel urodynamic; Urinary incontinence; Urodynamic

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; URINE INCONTINENCE; URODYNAMICS; UROLOGIC SURGERY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; URINARY INCONTINENCE; URODYNAMICS; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES;

EID: 67650569180     PISSN: 00040614     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Botlero R, Urquhart DM, Davis SR et al. Prevalence and incidence of urinary incontinence in women: review of the literature and investigation of methodological issues. Int J Urol, 2008; 15: 230.
2. Córcoles MB, Sánchez SA, Bachs GJ et al. Quality of life in patients with urinary incontinence. Actas Urol Esp 2008; 32: 202.
3. Goode PS, Burgio KL, Redden DT et al. Population based study of incidence and predictors of urinary incontinence in black and white older adults. J Urol 2008; 179: 1449.
4. Minassian VA, Stewart WF, Wood GC. Urinary incontinence in women: variation in prevalence estimates and risk factors. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111: 324.
5. Dooley Y, Kenton K, Cao G et al. Urinary incontinence prevalence: results from the Nacional Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. J Urol 2008; 179: 656.
6. Duggan PM, Wilson PD, Norton P et al. Utilization of preoperative urodynamic investigations by gynecologists who frequently operate for female urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2003; 14: 282.
7. Holroyd-Leduc JM, Tannenbaum C, Thorpe KE et al. What type of urinary incontinence does this woman have?. JAMA 2008; 299: 1446.
8. Santiagu SK, Arianayagam M, Wang A et al. Urinary incontinence- pathophysiology and management outline. Aust Fam Physician 2008; 37: 106.
9. Takacs EB, Zimmern PE. Recommendations for urodynamic assessment in the evaluation of women with stress urinary incontinence. Nat Clin Pract Urol 2006; 3: 544.
10. Hermieu JF, Comité d'urologie et de pelvi-pé- rinéologie de la femme Association Fraçaise d'Urologie: Recommendations for the urodynamic examination in the investigation of non-neurological female urinary incontinence. Prog Urol 2007; 17: 1264.
11. Mckertich K. Urinary incontinence-assessment in women: stress, urge or both?. Aust Fam Physician 2008; 37: 112.
12. Slack M, Tracey M, Hunsicker K et al. Urethral retro-resistance pressure: a new clinical measure of urethral function. Neurourol Urodyn 2004; 23: 656.
13. Mcguire EJ, Fitzpatrick CC, Wan J et al. Clinical assessment of urethral sphincter function. J Urol 1993; 150: 1452.
14. Williams ER, Klutke CG. Stress urinary incontinence: the evolution of the sling. Expert Rev Med Devices 2008; 5: 507.
15. Cundiff GW, Harris RL, Coates KW et al. Clinicals predictors of urinary incontinence in women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 262.
16. Summitt RL, Stovall TG, Bent AE et al. Urinary incontinence: correlation of history and brief office evaluation with multichannel urodynamic testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 166: 1835.
17. Patravali N. Ambulatory urodynamic monitoring: are we wasting our time?. J Obstet Gynaecol 2007; 27: 413.
18. Hockey J. Mixed urinary incontinence: continuing to confound?. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2007; 19: 521.
19. Choe JH, Lee JS, Seo JT. Urodynamic studies in women with stress urinary incontinence: Significant bacteriuria and risk factors. Neurourol Uro- dyn 2007; 26: 847.
20. Kartal ED, Yenilmez A, Kiremitci A et al. Effectiveness of ciprofloxacin prophylaxis in preventing bacteriuria caused by urodynamic study: a blind, randomized study of 192 patients. Urology 2006; 67: 1149.
21. Araujo MP, Oliveira E, Queiroz GC et al. Effect of an urodynamic study on women with urinary incontinence. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2007; 53: 122.
22. Ku JH, Kim SW, Kim HH et al. Patient experience with a urodynamic study: a prospective study in 208 patients. J Urol 2004; 171: 2307.
23. Yokoyama T, Nozaki K, Nose H et al. Tolerability and morbidity of urodynamic testing: a questionnaire-based study. Urology 2005; 66: 74.
24. Greenstein A, Bar-Yosef Y, Chen J et al. Does information provided to men before a urodynamic study affect their expectation of pain?. BJU Int 2005; 96: 1307.
25. Solá Dalenz V, Ricci Arriola P, Pardo Schanz J. Urodynamic study in the female urinary incontinence evaluation, with the new MoniTorr™ MR system (non-multichannel urodynamic with urethral retro-resistance pressure measure). Experience with 100 patients. Actas Urol Esp 2008; 32: 325.
26. Kayigil O. The coexistence of intrinsic sphincter deficiency with type II stress incontinence. J Urol 1999; 162: 1365.
27. Weber AM, Taylor RJ, Wei JT et al. The cost-effectiveness of preoperative testing (basic office assessment vs. urodynamics) for stress urinary incontinence in women. BJU Int 2002; 89: 356.