Is it possible to estimate urethral mobility based on maximal urethral closure pressure measurements?

Download PDF Czech version

Authors: Z. Nováková ¹; J. Mašata ²; K. Švabík ²
Authors‘ workplace: Gynekologicko-porodnické oddělení, Thomayerova nemocnice, Praha, primář MUDr. P. Kolek ¹; Gynekologicko-porodnická klinika VFN a 1. LF UK, Praha, přednosta prof. MUDr. A. Martan, DrSc. ²
Published in: Ceska Gynekol 2019; 84(2): 115-120
Category:

Overview

Objective: Is it possible to estimate urethral mobility based on MUCP measurements?

Design: Retrospective study.

Setting: Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 1st Medical Faculty, Charles University, General Teaching Hospital, Prague.

Methods: This retrospective study included 567 patients from three prospective studies within years 2002 to 2009. Ultrasound examination was performed in 560 of them and maximal urethral closure pressure (MUCP) values were measured in 507 women. The MUCP was defined as the difference between maximum urethral pressure and bladder pressure. An ultrasound examination was performed using the transperineal approach in accordance with the recommendations of the German Urogynecology Working Group and ICS, IUGA terminology. The mobility was expressed as a distance between the position at rest and at the maximal Valsalva manoeuvre. Data were summarized as mean and median, with SD and quantile range for measures of variability. Either a matched pairs t-test or Wilcoxon test was used for statistical evaluation.

Results: Mean MUCP was 47.4 cm H₂O (SD 22.2, first quantile 32, third quantile 62). Mean urethral descent was 20.6 mm (SD 8.2, first quantile 14.9, third quantile 25.6 mm). Using regression analysis there was an increase in urethral descent; this difference is statistically significant. For a MUCP increase of 10 cm H₂O we could estimate an increase in urethral descent of 1.1 mm.

Conclusion: We established a statistically significant relationship between urethral descent and MUCP. Unfortunately those differences are not clinically relevant, especially for MUCP over 20 cm H₂O. For MUCP below 20 cm H₂O low urethral descent is more likely. Clinical use of MUCP as predictor of urethral descent is limited due to the high variability involved.

Keywords:

maximum urethral closure pressure – MUCP – descent of the urethrovesical junction – urodynamic study – stress urinary incontinence

Sources

1. Adelowo, A., Dessie, S., Rosenblatt, P. The role of preoperative urodynamics in urogynecologic procedures. J Minimally Invasive Gynecol, 2014, 21, 2, p. 217–222.

2. Dietz, HP., Clarke, B., Herbison, P. Bladder neck mobility and urethral closure pressure as predictors of genuine stress incontinence. Int Urogynecol J, 2002, 13, p. 289–293.

3. Dietz, HP., Clarke, B. The urethral pressure profile and ultrasound imaging of the lower urinary tract. Int Urogynecol J, 2001, 12, 1, p. 38–41.

4. Harris, N., Swithinbank, L., al Hayek, S., et al. Can maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) be used to predict outcome of surgical treatment of stress urinary incontinence? Neurourol Urodynam, 2011, 30, 8, p. 1609–1612.

5. Kawasaki, A., Wu, J., Amundsen, C., et al. Do urodynamic parameters predict persistent postoperative stress incontinence after midurethral sling? A systematic review. Int Urogynecol J, 2012, 23, p. 813–822.

6. Lemack, GE., Litman, HJ., Nager, C., et al. Preoperative clinical, demographic, and urodynamic measures associated with failure to demonstrate urodynamic stress incontinence in women enrolled in two randomized clinical trials of surgery for stress urinary incontinence. Int Urogynecol J, 2013, 24, 2, p. 269–274.

7. Lose, G., Brostrøm, S. Low-pressure urethra in women: What does it mean and what can it be used for? Int Urogynecol J, 2002, 13, p. 215–217.

8. Martan, A., Masata, J., Halaska M., et al. [Ultrasound examination of the lower urinary tract in women] Ces Gynek, 1997, 62, 6, p. 350–352.

9. Martan, A., Masata, J., Halaska, M. Inkontinence moči a ultrazvukové vyšetření dolního močového ústrojí u žen. PanMed, Praha, 2001, 190 s.

10. Martan, A., Masata, J., Halaska, M., et al. The effect of bladder filling on changes in ultrasonography parameters of the lower urinary tract in women with urinary stress incontinence. Ces Gynek, 2000, 65, 1, p. 10–13.

11. Martan, A., Masata, J., Halaska, M., et al. Changes in the position of the ureterovesical junction during maximal voluntary contractions and during maximal vaginal electric stimulation of the pelvic floor muscles. Ces Gynek, 1998, 63, 3, p. 186–188.

12. Martan, A., Petri, E., Masata, J., et al. The effect of increasing intra-abdominal pressure on the position of the bladder neck in ultrasound imaging. Geburtshilfe Und Frauenheilkunde, 2002, 62, 1, S. 37–41.

13. Masata, J., Svabik, K., Martan, A., et al. What ultrasound parameter is optimal in the examination of position and mobility of urethrovesical junction? Ces Gynek, 2005, 70, 4, p. 280–285.

14. Masata, M., Svabik, K., Martan, A. Ultrasound in urogynecology. Ces Gynek, 2012, 77, 4, p. 292–298.

15. Minaglia, S., Urwitz-Lane, R., Wong, M. Effectiveness of transobturator tape in women with decreased urethral mobility. J Reprod Med, 2009, 54, p. 15–19.

16. Nager, CW., Brubaker, L., Litman, HJ., et al. A randomized trial of urodynamic testing before stress-incontinence surgery. N Engl J Med, 2012, 366, 21, p. 1987–1997.

17. Parrillo, LM., Ramchandani, P., Smith, AL. Can intrinsic sphincter deficiency be diagnosed by urodynamics? Urol Clin, 2014, 41, 3, p. 375–381.

18. Pirpiris, A., Shek, KL., Dietz, PH. Urethral mobility and urinary incontinence. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 2010, 36, p. 507–511.

19. Popovic, I., de Tayrac, R., Demaria, F., et al. Efficiency of the transobturator suburethral tape in the treatment of 61 patients presenting intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Gynecol Obstet Fertil, 2007, 35, 12, p. 1204–1208.

20. Rezapour, M., Falconer, C., Ulmsten, U. Tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) in stress incontinent women with intrinsic sphincter deficiency (ISD) – a long-term follow-up. Int Urogynecol J, 2001, 2, p. 12–14.

21. Schierlitz, L., Dwyer, PL., Rosamilia, A., et al. Effectiveness of tension-free vaginal tape compared with transobturator tape in women with stress urinary incontinence and intrinsic sphincter deficiency: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol, 2008, 112, 6, p. 1253–1261.

22. Schierlitz, L., Dwyer, P., Rosamilia, A., et al. Three-year follow-up of tension-free vaginal tape compared with transobturator tape in women with stress urinary incontinence and intrinsic sphincter deficiency. Obstet Gynecol, 2012, 119, 2, p. 321–327.

23. Výtisková, T., Mašata, J., Švabík, K., et al. Hodnocení sestupu a mobility uretrovezikální junkce u žen se stresovou inkontinencí moči – ultrazvuková studie. Čes Gynek, 2018, 83, 3, s. 188–194.

24. Wlaźlak, E., Viereck, V., Kociszewski, J., et al. Role of intrinsic sphincter deficiency with and without urethral hypomobility on the outcome of tape insertion. Neurourol Urodyn, 2017, 36, 7, p. 1910–1916.