Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34363219›Full record

ArticleNeurourology and urodynamics2021

Head-to-head comparison of pressures during full cystometry, with clinical as well as in-depth signal-analysis, of air-filled catheters versus the ICS-standard water-filled catheters.

Peter F W M Rosier

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter F W M RosierDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0445-4563
University Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo compare in vivo differences of two catheter systems for urodynamics to further discover their measurement properties.

methodsSide-by-side catheterization with two catheters for intravesical and abdominal pressure during full cystometry in 36 prospectively recruited patients with analysis of mean and absolute differences at urodynamic events and post hoc in-depth signal analysis comparing the full pressure traces of both systems.

resultsThe mean pressure differences at urodynamic events between air-filled and water-filled systems are small, however, with a large variation, without a systematic difference. The majority of the intersystem differences are significantly larger than 5 cmH

conclusionsWe confirm earlier studies that showed random differences at events between air-filled and water-filled pressures during clinical urodynamic testing and confirm that these are intrinsic but not systematic-and still incompletely explained-offset-baseline differences. We determined on closer full measurement analysis after equalizing, that both systems are similar in displaying urodynamic pressure variations and amplitudes. We also confirm that both systems require awareness of intrinsic measurement properties during urodynamic testing and especially may necessitate adjustment of pressure offsets into a quantitative diagnosis of a urodynamic test.

Indexed as

UrodynamicsWaterCathetersHumansPressureUrinary BladderWater

Identifiers

PMID34363219
PMCPMC9291621
OpenAlexW3190397189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.