Evidence Hub

Ultrasound thickness of bladder wall in continent and incontinent women and its correlation with cystometry

Otsuki EN, Araujo Júnior E, Oliveira E, Sartori MG, Girão MJ, Jármy-Di Bella ZI

TheScientificWorldJournal, 2014

91 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare bladder wall thickness in two kinds of urinary incontinent women-stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and overactive bladder (OAB) with urodynamic detrusor overactivity (DO), and to compare them with continent patients by ultrasound, also, correlate with cystometric results in incontinent women.

METHODS: 91 women were divided into the following groups: continent (n = 31), SUI (n = 30), and DO (n = 30) groups after clinical evaluation and urodynamic test (only in incontinent women). Transvaginal ultrasound was performed to the bladder wall thickness (BWT) measurement. The mean of BWT was calculated and data were analyzed with ANOVA and Turkey's multiple comparison tests. Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) was used to compare two variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was performed to study BWT as a diagnostic parameter.

RESULTS: BWT in DO group was significantly higher than that in the other groups (P < 0.005). A moderate positive correlation was found between BWT and maximum bladder pressure during involuntary bladder contraction. There was no difference in BWT between SUI and continent groups. DO group had lower first desire to void and cystometric capacity. Maximum bladder pressure at detrusor contraction had a moderate positive correlation with BWT. The ROC revealed an area under the curve of 0.962 (95% CI, 0.90-1.01).

CONCLUSIONS: DO patients have increased bladder wall thickness, lower first desire to void, and lower cystometric…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 91 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free