Pves-Po/Qmax测定诊断膀胱出口梗阻的研究

Clinical study of Pves-Po/Qmax determination in diagnose of BOO

目的 :观察新方法 Pves-Po/Qm ax诊断膀胱出口梗阻 ( BOO)的优越性。方法 :采用德国进口 WIEST尿动力学仪 ,对 5 3例患者应用新方法 Pves-Po/Qm ax测定诊断 BOO,同时应用 ICS标准方法 Pves-Po/Qm ax测定诊断 BOO。根据逼尿肌低压低流、高压高流和正常逼尿肌压或高压伴低流或伴正常流率的不同排尿类型 ,分别应用两种方法判别 BOO进行自身对比。结果 :逼尿肌低压低流或高压高流 18例患者 ,应用 ICS标准方法 Pves-Pabd/Q max测定不能明确诊断有否BOO,但应用新方法 Pves-Po/Q max测定能明确诊断。逼尿肌高压伴低流或伴正常流率或正常逼尿肌压伴正常尿流率的 35例患者 ,分别应用两种方法诊断有否 BOO,结果基本一致。结论 :应用新方法比 ICS标准方法要优越 ,特别在逼尿肌低压低流或高压高流病例中能明确判定有否

Objective: It is to investigate the utility of Pves-Po/Qmax value in diagnosis of BOO. Methods: Fifty-three patients were diagnosed of BOO using the new method (Pves-Po/Qmax ) and ICS standard method (Pves-Pabd/Qmax). Diagnosis was done on Germany-made WIEST urodynamics meter. Results from the two methods were compared. Results: In 18 patients with low flow resulted from low pressure of detrusor urinae and high flow resulted from high pressure of detrusor urinae, BOO were identified accurately using the new method but not the ICS standard method. In 35 patients with high pressure of detrusor urinae accompanied by low flow, high pressure of detrusor urinae accompanied by normal flow, normal pressure of detrusor urinae accompanied by normal flow. The results from the two methods were roughly the same. Conclusion: New method was better than the ICS standard method in diagnosis of BOO. Especially in the cases with low flow resulted from low pressure of detrusor urinae and high flow resulted from high pressure of detrusor.