The Obstructive Effect of a Urethral Catheter

No AccessJournal of UrologyClinical Urology: Original Article1 Mar 1996The Obstructive Effect of a Urethral Catheter J.M. Reynard, C. Lim, S. Swami, and P. Abrams J.M. ReynardJ.M. Reynard , C. LimC. Lim , S. SwamiS. Swami , and P. AbramsP. Abrams View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(01)66341-9AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: The effect of a urethral catheter on pressure-flow relationships of the urethra has important implications for the practice and interpretation of pressure-flow studies. However, little attention has been directed to this question in the past in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia. We assessed the obstructive effect of an 8 Ch. urethral catheter in men who presented with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Materials and Methods: During combined pressure-flow studies 59 men completed 2 voids of similar volume with and without a urethral catheter in situ. Maximum flow rate, detrusor pressure at maximum flow and the group specific urethral resistance factor were measured and compared between these 2 voids. Results: There was no significant difference in maximum flow rate between voids (with catheter 9.1 ml. per second versus without catheter 8.6 ml. per second). Although detrusor pressure was significantly greater with the urethral catheter in situ (80 versus 67 cm. water), there was no significant difference in the group specific urethral resistance factor between the 2 voids (with catheter 42.1 cm. water versus without catheter 36.6 cm. water). Conclusions: An 8 Ch. catheter does not appear to have a significant obstructive effect in the urethra. This finding has important implications for the practice and interpretation of pressure-flow studies. References 1 : Quantification of urethral resistance and bladder function during voiding, with special reference to the effects of prostate size reduction on urethral obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Neurourol. Urodynam.1989; 8: 17. Google Scholar 2 : Practical Statistics for Medical Research. New York: Chapman & Hall1991. Google Scholar 3 : Intravesical pressure and urinary flow during micturition in normal subjects. Acta Chir. Scand.1957; 114: 49. Medline, Google Scholar 4 : Urethral resistance to micturition. Brit. J. Urol.1968; 40: 125. Google Scholar 5 : Precise urodynamic assessment of anatomic urethral obstruction in boys. Neurourol. Urodynam.1982; 1: 97. Google Scholar 6 : Precise urodynamic assessment of meatal and distal urethral stenosis in girls. Neurourol. Urodynam.1982; 1: 89. Google Scholar 7 : Effects of catheter size on urodynamic measurements in men undergoing elective prostatectomy. Brit. J. Urol.1987; 60: 64. Google Scholar 8 : Relationship of symptoms of prostatism to commonly used physiological and anatomical measures of the severity of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J. Urol.1993; 150: 351. Link, Google Scholar 9 : Objective analysis of infravesical obstruction and detrusor contractility; appraisal of the computer program Dx/CLIM and Schaefer nomogram. Neurourol. Urodynam.1992; 1: 394. abstract 61. Google Scholar 10 : The contribution of the bladder outlet to the relation between pressure and flow rate during micturition. In: Benign Prostatic Hypertrophy. Edited by . New York: Springer-Verlag1983: 470. Google Scholar 11 : Urodynamics: The Mechanics and Hydrodynamics of the Lower Urinary Tract. Bristol, United Kingdom: Adam Hilger Ltd.1980. Google Scholar Bristol Urological Institute, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom© 1996 by American Urological Association, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byWAGNER A, GODLEY M, DUFFY P and RANSLEY P (2018) A Novel, Inexpensive, Double Lumen Suprapubic Catheter for UrodynamicsJournal of Urology, VOL. 171, NO. 3, (1277-1279), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2004.Schmidt F, Shin P, Jorgensen T, Djurhuus J and Constantinou C (2018) Urodynamic Patterns of Normal Male Micturition: Influence of Water Consumption on Urine Production and Detrusor FunctionJournal of Urology, VOL. 168, NO. 4 Part 1, (1458-1463), Online publication date: 1-Oct-2002.CORMIER L, FERCHAUD J, GALAS J, GUILLEMIN F and MANGIN P (2018) Diagnosis of Female Bladder Outlet Obstruction and Relevance of the Parameter Area Under the Curve of Detrusor Pressure During Voiding: Preliminary ResultsJournal of Urology, VOL. 167, NO. 5, (2083-2087), Online publication date: 1-May-2002.MANIAM P and GOLDMAN H (2018) Removal of Transurethral Catheter During Urodynamics May Unmask Stress Urinary IncontinenceJournal of Urology, VOL. 167, NO. 5, (2080-2082), Online publication date: 1-May-2002.WALKER R, ROMANO G, DAVIES A, THEODOROU N, SPRINGALL R and ST CLAIR CARTER S (2018) PRESSURE FLOW STUDY DATA IN A GROUP OF ASYMPTOMATIC MALE CONTROL PATIENTS 45 YEARS OLD OR OLDERJournal of Urology, VOL. 165, NO. 2, (683-687), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2001.GROUTZ A, BLAIVAS J and SASSONE A (2018) DETRUSOR PRESSURE UROFLOWMETRY STUDIES IN WOMEN: EFFECT OF A 7FR TRANSURETHRAL CATHETERJournal of Urology, VOL. 164, NO. 1, (109-114), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2000.GROUTZ A, BLAIVAS J, CHAIKIN D, WEISS J and VERHAAREN M (2018) THE PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF POST-RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY INCONTINENCE: A CLINICAL AND VIDEO URODYNAMIC STUDYJournal of Urology, VOL. 163, NO. 6, (1767-1770), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2000. Volume 155Issue 3March 1996Page: 901-903 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 1996 by American Urological Association, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information J.M. Reynard More articles by this author C. Lim More articles by this author S. Swami More articles by this author P. Abrams More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...