2种尿动力学测压导管的比较

Comparative evaluation of two kinds of urodynamic catheters

目的:比较2种尿动力学测压导管的效果。方法:对60例下尿路功能障碍的女性患者行尿动力学检查,其中30例行侧孔灌注导管测量,30例行T-DOC导管测量,对2种测压管的效果进行比较。结果:侧孔灌注导管消毒插管3～5min,平均4min,全过程20～40min,平均33min,检查后5例患者出现全身发热症状;T-DOC导管消毒插管2～4min,平均3min,全过程15～35min,平均27min,检查后未出现尿路感染并发症。结论:侧孔灌注导管和T-DOC导管均是较理想的尿动力学测压导管,T-DOC导管具有相对简单、检查后尿路感染发生率低的优点。

Objective：To evaluate and compare two kinds of urodynamic catheters.Methods：Employed urodynamics test to 60 women with lower urinary dysfunction.Thirty patients were examined by catheters of side hole perfusion and the others examined by the T-DOC air-charged catheters.The outcome was evaluated and compared urodynamically and clinically.Results：The catheters of side hole perfusion were disinfected for 3-5 min,averaged 4 min.The whole process lasted 20-40 min,averaged 33 min.And 5 cases had fever after examination.While T-DOC catheters were sterilized for 2-4 min,averaged 3 min,with whole process lasting 15-35 min,averaged 27 min.And no urinary tract infection occurred after examination.Conclusions：The catheters of side hole perfussion and the T-DOC air-charged catheters are effective urodynamic catheters whereas the T-DOC air-charged catheters are with more simple operation process and low incidence of urinary tract infection.