## Abstract ## Aims In patients with urinary hesitancy, the standard time of urinary hesitancy has not been established. Accordingly, we have analyzed the association between urinary hesitancy and various uroflowmetric finding in the present study. ## Methods Between April 2009 and September 200
Measuring resistance index in patients with BPH and lower urinary tract symptoms
โ Scribed by Huseyin Ozdemir; Rahmi Onur; Zulkif Bozgeyik; Irfan Orhan; M. Sezai Ogras; Erkin Ogur
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 2005
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 128 KB
- Volume
- 33
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0091-2751
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
โฆ Synopsis
Purpose:
To assess the correlation between resistance index (ri) measured in different zones of the prostate and other more commonly used parameters of benign prostatic hyperplasia (bph).
Methods:
Twenty-six male patients who underwent a detailed evaluation for lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of bph were examined with transrectal (trus) color doppler sonography (cds). the correlation between ri in various prostate zones, and various urinary flow rates, and the international prostate symptom score (ipss), and prostatic volume measured by trus was determined.
Results:
No significant difference in ri was observed between right and left transition (tz) and peripheral zones (pz) in the prostate (p > 0.05). there was a significant correlation between mean ri and maximum urinary flow rate (qmax) and mean ri in both zones (r = -0.48 for tz and r = -0.39, p < 0.05 for pz). individual measurements in left and right tz ri were also correlated with qmax. there was a correlation between prostatic volume and both the right (p < 0.05, r = 0.56) and the left (p < 0.05, r = 0.58) tz ri, respectively.
Conclusion:
Our results demonstrate the potential value of ri measurement in the evaluation of patients with lower urinary tract symptoms suggestive of bph.
๐ SIMILAR VOLUMES
1 Other terms might have been chosen to denote accuracy and reproducibility. Terms such as precision, validity, observer or interrater variability, observer error, and efficacy have been used. At the moment it does not seem possible to establish a commonly accepted terminology.