Changes in uroflowmetry indicators with automatic interference elimination

Aim. The aim of this article is to compare the values of measured (Q MAX ) and calculated (Q MCLC ) maximal urine flow and the values of measured (T Q ) and calculated (T QCLC ) time to reach maximal flow in a large group of individual uroflowgrams during home uroflowmetry. Materials and Methods. We analysed 29,110 individual uroflowgrams from 719 patients with prostate adenoma, aged 50 to 73 years (mean age, 60.5 ± 8.2 years), collected between 2004 and 2024. Two algorithms were used: determination of Q MAX as the maximum value of the calculated flow (function extremum) and calculation of the actual value of the maximum flow after computer processing to eliminate interference and the WAG-effect (Q MCLC ). Results. The data showed the following differences between Q MAX and Q MCLC in the groups: 16.14 % for volumes up to 100 ml; 14.62 % for 100–200 ml; 13.75 % for 200–300 ml; 13.04 % for 300–400 ml; 14.25 % for 400–500 ml; 14.55 % for 500–600 ml; and 12.65 % for 600+ ml. For T Q and T QCLC values, the group differences were as follows: 3.49 % for volumes up to 100 mL; 2.27 % for 100–200 mL; 0.71 % for 200–300 mL; 0.97 % for 300–400 mL; 0.91 % for 400–500 mL; 3.51 % for 500–600 mL; and 1.51 % for 600+ mL. Conclusion. The study demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the maximum urine flow (Q MAX ) values obtained during measurement and the maximum urine flow value, after removing interference and the WAG effect (Q MCLS ) characteristic of any recorded volumes. Therefore, the accuracy of the data obtained may differ depending on the algorithm of uroflowgram processing. No statistically significant difference was found between T Q and T QCLC parameters. The algorithm of uroflowgrams processing used in the Sigma and Urovest uroflowmetry hardware and software system ensures high accuracy in determining maximum flow values; Urovest, in particular, has demonstrated reliability in this regard. The average determined difference between the Q MAX and Q MCLC values at different volumes of urination is 14.14 %.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Surgical practice (Russia)
Published
2024-12-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5922/2223-2427-2024-9-4-1
Primary Topic
Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Changes in uroflowmetry indicators with automatic interference elimination

В. В. Данилов, А. K. Shalaeva, V. V. Danilov, V. V. Danilov et al.
Surgical practice (Russia)
Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
article

Changes in uroflowmetry indicators with automatic interference elimination

В. В. Данилов, А. K. Shalaeva, V. V. Danilov, V. V. Danilov, I. Yu. Volnykh, V. V. Vashchenko, D. А. Radko
article en

Abstract

Aim. The aim of this article is to compare the values of measured (Q MAX ) and calculated (Q MCLC ) maximal urine flow and the values of measured (T Q ) and calculated (T QCLC ) time to reach maximal flow in a large group of individual uroflowgrams during home uroflowmetry. Materials and Methods. We analysed 29,110 individual uroflowgrams from 719 patients with prostate adenoma, aged 50 to 73 years (mean age, 60.5 ± 8.2 years), collected between 2004 and 2024. Two algorithms were used: determination of Q MAX as the maximum value of the calculated flow (function extremum) and calculation of the actual value of the maximum flow after computer processing to eliminate interference and the WAG-effect (Q MCLC ). Results. The data showed the following differences between Q MAX and Q MCLC in the groups: 16.14 % for volumes up to 100 ml; 14.62 % for 100–200 ml; 13.75 % for 200–300 ml; 13.04 % for 300–400 ml; 14.25 % for 400–500 ml; 14.55 % for 500–600 ml; and 12.65 % for 600+ ml. For T Q and T QCLC values, the group differences were as follows: 3.49 % for volumes up to 100 mL; 2.27 % for 100–200 mL; 0.71 % for 200–300 mL; 0.97 % for 300–400 mL; 0.91 % for 400–500 mL; 3.51 % for 500–600 mL; and 1.51 % for 600+ mL. Conclusion. The study demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the maximum urine flow (Q MAX ) values obtained during measurement and the maximum urine flow value, after removing interference and the WAG effect (Q MCLS ) characteristic of any recorded volumes. Therefore, the accuracy of the data obtained may differ depending on the algorithm of uroflowgram processing. No statistically significant difference was found between T Q and T QCLC parameters. The algorithm of uroflowgrams processing used in the Sigma and Urovest uroflowmetry hardware and software system ensures high accuracy in determining maximum flow values; Urovest, in particular, has demonstrated reliability in this regard. The average determined difference between the Q MAX and Q MCLC values at different volumes of urination is 14.14 %.

Surgical practice (Russia)(4)
Vladivostok State Medical University (RU), Far Eastern Federal University (RU), Far Eastern State Medical University (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.