International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 78–82

A comparison of maximum cystometric bladder capacity with maximum environmental voided volumes

  • E. Yoon
  • S. Swift
Original Article

Abstract

The aim of the study was, to determine whether maximum cystometric capacity accurately reflects the maximum functional bladder volume in women with urinary incontinence. We performed a retrospective chart review involving 85 women between the ages of 22 and 89 with primary complaints of urinary incontinence. The maximum cystometric capacity as determined by cystometry was compared with the maximum environmental voided volumes as recorded in a 24-hour voiding diary, using Pearson's correlation coefficients and pairedt-tests. Patients diagnosed as having a small bladder capacity (<300 ml maximum volume) based on cystometry were also examined with contingency table analysis to determine whether the bladder volumes in the voiding diaries supported the diagnosis of a small bladder. In 85 subjects the average maximum cystometric capacity was 14.7% less than the maximum volume recorded in the voiding diary. The correlation between the maximum cystometric capacity and maximum functional bladder volume wasr=0.473 (P<0.001). However, there was a statistically significant difference between the two volumes by pairedt-test analysis (P=0.006). Using cystometry to diagnose small bladder capacity showed a sensitivity of 62.9% and a specificity of 71.2% when using voiding diary volumes as the criterion standard. The positive predictive value was 51.4% and the negative predictive value was 84.0%. These results suggest that whereas the maximum bladder capacity measured by cystometry correlates with maximum environmental bladder capacity as determined by 24-hour voiding diaries, there is a statistically significant difference. The diagnosis of a small bladder should not be based on office cystometry alone.

Keywords

Cystometrogram 24-Hour Voiding Diary 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Torrens M, Abrams P. Cystometry.Urol Clin North Am 1979;6:79–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wyman J, Choi S, Harkins S et al. The urinary diary in the evaluation of incontinent women: a test-retest analysis.Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:812–817PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heit M, Brubaker L. Clinical correlates in patients not completing a voiding diary.Int Urogynecol J 1996;7:256–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Diokno AC, Wells TJ, Brink CA. Comparison of self-reported voided volume with cystometric bladder capacity.Urol Neurol Urodyn 1987;137:698–700Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Swift SE. Reliability of performing a screening cystometrogram using a fetal monitor for the detection of detrusor instability.Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:708–712CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abrams P, Blavis JG, Stanton SL, Anderson JT. The standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function.Int Urogynecol J 1990;1:45–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Langer R, Ron-El R, Newman M, Herman A, Caspi E. Detrusor instability following colposuspension for urinary incontinence.Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1988;95:607–609PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ouslander J, Leach G, Staskin D et al. Prospective evaluation of an assessment strategy for geriatric urinary incontinence.J Am Geriatr Soc 1989;37:715–724PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cass AS, Ward BD, Markland C. Comparison of slow and rapid fill cystometry using liquid and air.J Urol 1970;104:104–108PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jensen JK. Urodynamic evaluation. In: Ostergard DR, Bent AE, eds. Urogynecology and urodynamics, 4th edn. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1991:116–121Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jensen JK. Urodynamic evaluation. In: Ostergard DR, Bent AE, eds. Urogynecology and urodynamics, 4th edn. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1991;115.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Yoon
    • 1
  • S. Swift
    • 1
  1. 1.PGY3 Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyMedical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA

Personalised recommendations