METHODS: Using urodynamic data of consecutive 77 women with LUTS, first, we classified DU based on previously reported five criteria. Second, we assessed the potential correlation between multiple parameters and WF-AUC. Third, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to determine the cutoff value of WF-AUC for diagnosing DU based on previously reported five criteria. Fourth, a linear regression analysis was conducted and compared using multiple criteria and female bladder outlet obstruction index (BOOIf).
RESULTS: WF-AUC was positively correlated with the maximum values of WF, bladder contractility index (BCI), and projected isovolumetric pressure 1 (PIP1) with correlation coefficients of 0.63, 0.57, and 0.34, respectively. AUC for diagnosing DU based on previously reported five criteria ranging from 0.773 to 0.896 with different cutoff values of AUC-WF. The Spearman\'s correlation test revealed that BOOIf was significantly correlated with BCI, but not Wmax, PIP1 and WF-AUC.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the non-inferiority of the WF-AUC compared to previously reported criteria for defining DU. Depending on the cutoff value, the WF-AUC could appropriately evaluate women with DU, regardless of the presence of BOO.
方法:使用连续77例LUTS女性的尿动力学数据,首先,我们根据以前报道的5个标准对DU进行分类.第二,我们评估了多个参数与WF-AUC之间的潜在相关性.第三,根据先前报道的5项标准,进行受试者工作特征曲线分析,以确定诊断DU的WF-AUC的截止值.第四,采用多重标准和女性膀胱出口梗阻指数(BOOIf)进行线性回归分析并进行比较.
结果:WF-AUC与WF的最大值呈正相关,膀胱收缩指数(BCI),和预计等容压力1(PIP1),相关系数分别为0.63、0.57和0.34。诊断DU的AUC基于先前报道的从0.773到0.896的五个标准,具有不同的AUC-WF截止值。Spearman相关检验显示BOOIf与BCI显著相关,而与Wmax无关。PIP1和WF-AUC。
结论:这项研究证明了与先前报道的定义DU的标准相比,WF-AUC的非劣效性。根据截止值,WF-AUC可以适当评估患有DU的女性,不管BOO的存在。