• Users Online: 262
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 288-294

Value of intravesical prostatic protrusion estimated by ultrasound in the diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction and acute urinary retention in benign prostatic hyperplasia


1 Department of Radio-diagnosis, Al-Zahraa University Hospital, Al-Azhar Faculty of Medicine, Cairo, Egypt
2 Department of Urology, Al-Zahraa University Hospital, Al-Azhar Faculty of Medicine, Cairo, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Amany A Soliman
MD Degree of Urology, Al-Zahraa University Hospital, Cairo 19337
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/AZMJ.AZMJ_77_19

Rights and Permissions

Objective This prospective study compared the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of intravesical protrusion of prostate (IPP), prostate volume (PV), detrusor wall thickness (DWT), and post-voiding residual urine (PVR) for diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) and predicted acute urinary retention (AUR) in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Patients and methods Eighty patients of 50 years or older with obstructed lower urinary symptoms owing to prostate enlargement were included in this study. Of them, 20 patients presented with acute retention of urine. All patients underwent the following: international prostatic symptoms score, quality-of-life question, digital rectal examination, free uroflowmetry (Qmax), and transabdominal ultrasound, which measured DWT, PV, IPP, and PVR. Pressure flow study (PFS) was done to differentiate obstructed from the nonobstructed bladder. IPP, PV, DWT, Qmax, and PVR were used as index tests. To differentiate the effectiveness of these index tests, the area under the curve was calculated for each index. Results Eighty patients were classified into four groups according to their presentation and PFS finding: group I included 30 patients with no BOO [bladder outlet obstruction index (BOOI) < 40], group II included 30 patients with BOO (BOOI >40), group III included 20 patients who presented with AUR, and group IV included 20 normal men as a control group. There were significant differences in PV, IPP, DWT, Qmax, and PVR between obstructed and nonobstructed patients, with a significant correlation with the BOOI. There was no significant difference regarding age and international prostatic symptoms score. There was a significant correlation between IPP and DWT with PFS in the diagnosis of BOO in patients complaining from benign prostatic hyperplasia. IPP more than 7.5 mm had the best accuracy (90.5%) in the diagnosis of BOO. IPP more than 7.5 mm and DWT more than 2 mm diagnosed acute retention of urine in 90% of patients. Conclusion IPP measurement is the best noninvasive test in detecting BOO in comparison with other index tests. Combined IPP and DWT were more accurate in predicted BOO and AUR than other index tests.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed395    
    Printed18    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded44    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal