Article

OBJECTIVE: To compare the data obtained through video urodynamics (VUD) with
those obtained through one voiding cycle ambulatory urodynamics monitoring (AUM)
in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: A comparative study was
conducted in 69 patients with SCI (mean age+/-s.d. 44+/-16.9 years), 51 men and
18 women, who were subjected to AUM and VUD. RESULTS: A lack of agreement was
observed between the two tests with respect to the cystometric capacity (CC) (ml)
(275+/-197.2 AUM versus 416+/-198.3 VUD), filling pressure (cm H2O) (4+/-5.3 AUM
versus 9+/-12.5 VUD), bladder compliance (ml cm(-1) H2O) (116+/-114.9 AUM versus
161+/-179.4 VUD), maximum detrusor contraction pressure (cm H2O) (87+/-65.2 AUM
versus 47+/-35.0 VUD), post-void residual (ml) (206+/-201.5 AUM versus
308+/-237.7 VUD) and stress urinary incontinence (kappa index: -0.052). Only the
CC obtained in the AUM was in agreement with the mean bladder volume gathered
from the frequency-volume chart. Agreement was observed with respect to the
presence of neurogenic detrusor overactivity (kappa index: 0.307) and bladder
outlet obstruction index (cm H2O) (17+/-48.0 AUM versus 15+/-18.7 VUD). There was
no clear association between AUM parameters and bladder neck morphology, the
presence of radiological detrusor-external sphincter dyssynergy or vesicoureteral
reflux observed in the VUD. CONCLUSION: The differences between both methods
discourage the use of AUM with just one voiding cycle in the evaluation of
patients with SCI.

Langue : ANGLAIS