2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2013.11.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensibilité au changement du score USP (Urinary Symptoms Profile) après traitement chirurgical de l’hypertrophie bénigne de la prostate (HBP)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 13 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our study noted a much higher rate of bladder dysfunction (76%) than previous investigations, with McCarthy et al finding 43% of patients to have bladder dysfunction at 5 years and Korse reporting 47% reducing to 41% on long-term follow-up [12, 15]. We hypothesise that this difference may be explained by the use of the objective USP score which is known to have a high sensitivity to a range of urological symptoms and patients would often report a symptom-free bladder, only to show dysfunction on the USP [27]. This conjecture is supported by the findings of Hellström et al who describe how although only 41% of CES patients complained of bladder dysfunction, urodynamic findings were abnormal in 76% [9].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Our study noted a much higher rate of bladder dysfunction (76%) than previous investigations, with McCarthy et al finding 43% of patients to have bladder dysfunction at 5 years and Korse reporting 47% reducing to 41% on long-term follow-up [12, 15]. We hypothesise that this difference may be explained by the use of the objective USP score which is known to have a high sensitivity to a range of urological symptoms and patients would often report a symptom-free bladder, only to show dysfunction on the USP [27]. This conjecture is supported by the findings of Hellström et al who describe how although only 41% of CES patients complained of bladder dysfunction, urodynamic findings were abnormal in 76% [9].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 77%