Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Detrusor underactivity (DU) is a common cause of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). To date, no consensus has been reached on the urodynamic criteria for defining DU. We previously proposed the area under the curve of the Watts factor (WF-AUC) as a new parameter for diagnosing DU. By comparing previously reported five criteria for DU and WF-AUC, we analyzed whether the WF-AUC could assess detrusor contraction in women with LUTS.
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.
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.
摘要：
目的：逼尿肌活动不足（DU）是下尿路症状（LUTS）的常见原因。迄今为止,关于定义DU的尿动力学标准尚未达成共识。我们先前提出了Watts因子（WF-AUC）曲线下面积作为诊断DU的新参数。通过比较先前报告的DU和WF-AUC的五个标准，我们分析了WF-AUC是否可以评估LUTS女性逼尿肌收缩.
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。
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。
