Ultrasonic Validation of Residual Bladder Volume in Postvaginal Hysterectomy Patients

Maymon, Ron; Gilboa, Shlomo; Abramowicz, Jacques S.; Shulman, Adrian; Toar, Michael; Bahary, Charles

doi:10.1159/000293164

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We believe it is not necessary to modify the original volume estimation formula, which was based on the approximation of an ellipsoid. This finding further supports the view that ultrasonography is a reliable method in bladder volume estimation in different clinical situations, such as prostatic hypertrophy, cystocele and following anterior colporrhaphy or vaginal hysterectomy [4,5,[8][9][10].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Ultrasonographic estimation of postpartum postvoid residual bladder volume: A comparison between transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasonography

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Postvoid residual bladder volume (PVRBV) was estimated in 89 patients with postpartum urinary retention using two ultrasonographic volume estimation methods. The PVRBV estimated by transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasonography are compared using the plot of difference against mean and the paired t-test. Neither showed any significant difference between the two methods (paired sample t-test, P > 0.05). The two methods have high correlation coefficient of 0.903 (Spearman's correlation, P < 0.0001). Either ultrasonographic volume estimation method gives reasonable bladder volume assessment in postpartum patients and could be used interchangeably as the clinical situation requires.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Ultrasonographic estimation of postpartum postvoid residual bladder volume: A comparison between transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasonography

1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ultrasonographic evaluation of bladder volume has been described previously and seems to be a valid method compared to the volume of urine collected by transurethral catheterization, with a specificity of 97.7% [13]. Ultrasonographic determination of the urine volume has good intra-and interobserver reproducibility, as shown by Chan, who also confirmed the strong correlation with urine collected by catheterization (r=0.983) [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Prospective 3D ultrasonographic evaluation of immediate postpartum urine retention volume in 100 women who delivered vaginally

Demaria

Amar

Biau

et al. 2003

International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunctio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our objective was to determine the reproducibility and validity of urine retention volumes measured by 3D ultrasonography (3D-US) 2 h postpartum. This was a longitudinal prospective study of 100 women who delivered vaginally. Each woman underwent five successive urine retention measurements with the Bladder Scan 2 h after vaginal delivery, followed by transurethral catheterization to determine the real volume. The reproducibility of only the last four scan values was analyzed with an intraclass correlation coefficient, and that of determinations 4 and 5 with a Bland-Altman plot. The validity of the device was similarly evaluated using the mean four-scan and real values. Pearson's correlation coefficient was calculated and a least-trimmed squares robust linear-regression model was used. All tests were two-sided with a 5% a risk. Results showed that 3D-US measurements were highly reproducible, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.974 (95% CI:0.964-0.981). 3D-US also accurately estimated the real urine volume (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.924; 95% CI:0.888-0.949), but tended to underestimate by about 6.8%. The between-technique Pearson correlation coefficient was 0.94 (P<0.0001) and the regression analysis gave an R 2 of 0.914. Urine retention volumes exceeded 500 ml in 55 women, and 1 l in 7. We concluded that 3D-US was reliably able to measure postpartum urine retention volume.

show abstract

“…The residual variance of equation (2) was 0.1597, and the residual standard deviation was 0.3996. From the linear regression formula and its residual standard deviation, a probability estimate of urinary retention (defined arbitrarily in this study as the catheterized BV 6150 ml, as it is one of the commonest criteria used) [4,8,[17][18][19][20] was made using the ultrasound-estimated BV as the predictor. Assuming that the measurements are normally distributed, the probability of urinary retention is the probability density of the normal deviate about the 150 ml point.…”

Section: Statistical Methods and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Any commonly accepted definitions of urinary retention could be used. Various definitions for urinary retention have been published by different authors and they include: 10 ml [22], 40 ml [23], 50 ml [24][25][26], 100 ml [27][28][29], 150 ml [4,8,[17][18][19][20], 200 ml [9,30,31], 400 ml [10], 500 ml [32,33], and 600 ml [34]. However, these values appear arbitrary, as there was no reason offered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Probability Model for Ultrasound Estimation of Bladder Volume in the Diagnosis of Female Urinary Retention

Yip¹,

Sahota²,

Chang³

2003

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate a probability model for ultrasound estimation of bladder volume in the diagnosis of female urinary retention, which is a common condition in the postpartum period. Methods: A total of 53 women with vaginal delivery were recruited on postpartum day 1, and their bladder volumes were first estimated by ultrasound. Immediately after the ultrasound scans the bladders were catheterized for the true bladder volumes. The ultrasound-estimated bladder volumes were then compared with the catheterized bladder volumes. The data were first tested for non-normality, and then logarithmic transformed in order to conform to normality. A probability model was built using the logarithmic-transformed data, based on the following: an arbitrary cut-off value of 150 ml for urinary retention, linear regression analysis, and paired difference analysis. Results: There was a linear relationship between the ultrasound-estimated and catheterized bladder volumes, which can be represented by the equation: log₁₀ (Vc) = 0.2959 + 0.8853 log₁₀ (Vu), where Vc = catheterized bladder volume, and Vu = ultrasound-estimated bladder volume. A normogram was constructed, and the probability of urinary retention presented. Conclusions: The results of this study showed that our method and statistics are logical by which the probability model of urinary retention is precise enough to support clinical decision-making.

show abstract

Ultrasonic Validation of Residual Bladder Volume in Postvaginal Hysterectomy Patients

Cited by 16 publications

References 15 publications

Ultrasonographic estimation of postpartum postvoid residual bladder volume: A comparison between transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasonography

Ultrasonographic estimation of postpartum postvoid residual bladder volume: A comparison between transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasonography

Prospective 3D ultrasonographic evaluation of immediate postpartum urine retention volume in 100 women who delivered vaginally

A Probability Model for Ultrasound Estimation of Bladder Volume in the Diagnosis of Female Urinary Retention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About