Fluid perfused urethral pressure profilometry and Valsalva leak point pressure: A comparative study in a biophysical model of the urethra
World Journal of Urology , Volume 25 - Issue 4 p. 423- 429
In patient studies the correlation between maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) and Valsalva leak point pressure (LPP) is meagre at best (r = 0.22-0.50). We therefore studied the relation between MUCP and LPP in a flexible and extensible model urethra. We applied differently sized pressure zones and different degrees of resistance to a biophysical model urethra by stepwise inflating three types of blood pressure cuff placed around the model. At each degree of resistance we measured detrusor LPP, an in vitro equivalent of Valsalva LPP. Subsequently, we recorded the Urethral Pressure Profile using a water-perfused 5F end-hole catheter at four withdrawal rates and five perfusion rates and calculated MUCP. We tested the dependence of LPP on pressure zone length and MUCP on perfusion rate, withdrawal rate and pressure zone length using analysis of variance. We tested the correlation between LPP and MUCP using Pearson's correlation coefficient and Linear Regression. LPP did not significantly depend on the pressure zone length (P = 0.80) and increased linearly with increasing cuff pressure. MUCP also increased with increasing cuff pressure, however, MUCP significantly depended (P < 0.01) on perfusion rate, withdrawal rate and pressure zone length. MUCP increased with increasing perfusion rate, and decreased with increasing withdrawal rate. In our model urethra MUCP only accurately reflected urethral resistance for a very limited number of combinations of perfusion rate and withdrawal rate. LPP reflected urethral resistance independent of the type of pressure zone.
|, , , ,|
|World Journal of Urology|
|Organisation||Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam|
Idzenga, T, Pel, J.J.M, & van Mastrigt, R. (2007). Fluid perfused urethral pressure profilometry and Valsalva leak point pressure: A comparative study in a biophysical model of the urethra. World Journal of Urology, 25(4), 423–429. doi:10.1007/s00345-007-0180-9