Effectiveness of the portable ultrasound bladder scanner in the measurement of residual urine volume after total mesorectal extirpation

Abstract

The measurement of residual urine volume by bladder catheterization causes quite some suffering to the patient and sometimes causes urinary tract infections. To evaluate the postoperative measurement of residual urine volume with a portable ultrasound bladder scanner (Bladder Scan BVI 3000) and the cost-benefit analysis as compared with postoperative catheterization we carried out a study on 30 patients with primary rectal cancer. The data were then compared with actual urine volumes. This was a prospective study dealing with the economical benefit of ultrasound scanning over catheterization during the hospital stay. The ultrasound bladder scanner was found to be a reliable method of estimating residual urine volume since its data correlated with actual volumes with a coefficient of 0.9. The results satisfied both physicians and patients. Ultrasound scanning of the bladder to measure residual urine volume reduced the frequency of catheterization by 38% as compared with the patients on intermittent catheterization, with 17.4 catheters saved for each patient. In conclusion, the ultrasound bladder scanner could protect patients from the discomfort and urethral injury which might have been caused by bladder catheters, thus decreasing medical expenses. This technique will play an important role in determining whether to conduct invasive urethral catheterization for postoperative urinary disturbance in rectal cancer.

Accuracy of post‐void residual urine volume measurement using a portable ultrasound bladder scanner with real‐time pre‐scan imaging

“…However, contrary to our expectation, there was no difference in the accuracy between the two devices. This was probably due to the large scan plane of the bladder scanner without RPI; it was likely already large enough to have a good correlation with the true volume 1, 24–26…”

The reliability and reproducibility of ultrasonography for measuring the residual urine volume in men with lower urinary tract symptoms

“…The measurement of PVR by ultrasonography (US) could protect patients from the discomfort and risk of urethral injury caused by catheters [7] . US is easy, safe, noninvasive, cost-effective, painless, repeatable, less time-consuming and demands little co-operation from the patient [4] .…”

The effectiveness of the ultrasound bladder scanner in reducing urinary tract infections: a meta‐analysis

“…There is an emerging need to analyse the available research comparing the use of the ultrasound bladder scanner followed by the application or not of an intermittent/ extemporaneous catheter vs. the clinical judgment of the nurses who decide whether or not to apply an intermittent/ extemporaneous catheter and the effect of these procedures in reducing CAUTIs, given that: 1 bladder ultrasound is recommended for the evaluation of bladder volume in patients with urinary retention because of its easy use, reliability, accuracy and sensitivity (Tseng et al 2008, Oh-Oka & Fujisawa 2007, Byun et al 2003, Araki et al 2003, Dudley et al 2003, Topper et al 1993, Borrie et al 2001, Anton et al 1998, Massagli et al 1989), 2 acute urinary retention is managed in daily practice by extemporaneous/intermittent bladder catheterisations applied by the nurse on the basis of their clinical judgment (e.g. the number of hours since last voiding, the presence of the bladder globe) (Borrie et al 2001, Coombes & Millard 1994, 3 the application of a bladder catheter exposes the patient to the risk of CAUTI (Kalsi et al 2003, Kunin 2001, Gastmeier et al 2000, 4 the best way to reduce the incidence of CAUTIs is to avoid unnecessary catheterisations (Shekelle et al 1999).…”