International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 400–406

A multicentered comparison of measurements obtained with microtip and external water pressure transducers

  • Andrew F. Hundley
  • Morton B. Brown
  • Linda Brubaker
  • Geoffrey W. Cundiff
  • Karl Kreder
  • Peter Lotze
  • Holly E. Richter
  • Halina Zyczynski
  • Anne M. Weber
  • Anthony G. Visco
Original Article

DOI: 10.1007/s00192-005-0027-0

Cite this article as:
Hundley, A.F., Brown, M.B., Brubaker, L. et al. Int Urogynecol J (2006) 17: 400. doi:10.1007/s00192-005-0027-0

Abstract

This study compared simultaneous intravesical pressure readings obtained with catheter-mounted microtip transducers and external water pressure transducer catheters during filling cystometry. Women undergoing multichannel urodynamic testing were randomly assigned to one of three groups: two microtip catheters, two external water pressure transducer catheters, or one of each type. Intravesical pressure was measured simultaneously for each transducer combination in each subject for minimal and maximal Valsalva effort and minimal, moderate, and maximal cough effort at two sequential bladder volumes (150 and 300 ml). Paired t tests were used to compare the means of the intravesical pressure obtained by the two types of catheters. The largest mean differences were observed when comparing microtip and water pressure transducers. Correlations of maximum pressure were consistently high between two microtip transducers and two water pressure transducers but lower for the microtip–water combination. Excellent reproducibility was demonstrated with transducers of similar types for intravesical pressures recorded during Valsalva and cough in women without prolapse. However, considerable variability was seen in pressures recorded by different transducers, particularly dependent on the water catheter manufacturer, indicating that intravesical pressure recordings from microtip and water-based systems are not interchangeable.

Keywords

MicrotipPressure transducerCough pressureValsalvaCorrelation

Copyright information

© International Urogynecology Journal 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew F. Hundley
    • 1
  • Morton B. Brown
    • 2
  • Linda Brubaker
    • 3
  • Geoffrey W. Cundiff
    • 4
  • Karl Kreder
    • 5
  • Peter Lotze
    • 6
  • Holly E. Richter
    • 7
  • Halina Zyczynski
    • 8
  • Anne M. Weber
    • 9
  • Anthony G. Visco
    • 1
    • 10
  1. 1.Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic SurgeryUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Data Coordinating CenterUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  3. 3.Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic SurgeryLoyola UniversityMaywoodUSA
  4. 4.Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic SurgeryJohns Hopkins Bayview Medical CenterBaltimoreUSA
  5. 5.Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic SurgeryUniversity of IowaIowa CityUSA
  6. 6.Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic SurgeryBaylor College of MedicineHoustonUSA
  7. 7.University of Alabama at Birmingham Continence CenterBirminghamUSA
  8. 8.Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Pelvic SurgeryMagee Women’s HospitalPittsburghUSA
  9. 9.National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentBethesdaUSA
  10. 10.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA