Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 1995 article

Voiding cystourethrography in boys: does the presence of the catheter obscure the diagnosis of posterior urethral valves?

29Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : au. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

OBJECTIVE: In voiding cystourethrography, the urethral catheter may or may not be left in place during voiding. The main argument for removing the catheter is that the diagnosis of posterior urethral valves may be missed because the catheter can hold open the valve, efface it, and render it invisible. However, if the catheter does not prevent the diagnosis of urethral disease, it is preferable to leave it in place. The catheter makes it possible to repeat the procedure easily if necessary, and using it to drain the bladder provides information about ureteric obstruction in the presence of vesicoureteric reflux. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to determine whether leaving the urethral catheter in place throughout voiding cystourethrography affects the efficacy of the procedure for the diagnosis of posterior urethral valves. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three radiologists reviewed the preoperative voiding cystourethrograms obtained in 48 boys who ranged in age from 1 day to 10 years old (mean, 1.5 years). All patients had a diagnosis of posterior urethral valves made at cystoscopy, which was used as the gold standard. The voiding cystourethrogram was obtained with a catheter in place during voiding in 28 (58%) of the 48 boys, without a catheter in 17 (35%), and with and then without a urethral catheter during the voiding phase of the study in three (6%). RESULTS: Posterior urethral valves were detected on 25 (89%) of the 28 voiding cystourethrograms obtained with a urethral catheter in place and in 15 (88%) of the 17 voiding cystourethrograms done without a urethral catheter. The five children in whom posterior urethral valves had been diagnosed by cystoscopy but were not detected on voiding cystourethrography had no dilatation of the posterior urethra nor any other evidence of obstruction; these were possibly false-positive cystoscopic diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Our results show that a urethral catheter does not obscure posterior urethral valves in boys and need not be removed routinely during the voiding phase of voiding cystourethrography.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Voiding cystourethrography in boys: does the presence of the catheter obscure the diagnosis of posterior urethral valves?
Date Crossref
01/05/1995
Éditeur
American Roentgen Ray Society
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Pediatric Urology and Nephrology StudiesUrological Disorders and TreatmentsUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.