Urethrography in men: conventional technique versus clamp method
To compare examination adequacy and patient discomfort during retrograde urethrography (RUG) performed by using the conventional balloon method versus those of RUG and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) performed with the clamp method of using drip infusion for the administration of contrast material...
Saved in:
Published in | Radiology Vol. 252; no. 1; pp. 240 - 246 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
United States
01.07.2009
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | To compare examination adequacy and patient discomfort during retrograde urethrography (RUG) performed by using the conventional balloon method versus those of RUG and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) performed with the clamp method of using drip infusion for the administration of contrast material.
This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board; written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Eighty men (mean age, 64.3 years +/- 16 [standard deviation]; range, 18-85 years) suspected of having urethral stenosis were randomly distributed into two groups for urethrography: a control group (n = 36) and a clamp group (n = 44). In 11 of the 36 patients in the control group, the conventional balloon method could not be used, so these patients were transferred to the clamp group. Drip infusion was used to administer contrast material for RUG, and, except in cases where a suprapubic catheter was used (n = 8), for VCUG. The pain levels reported by patients were recorded by using a verbal descriptor scale (VDS) and a visual analogue scale (VAS).
In the control group, RUG was successfully performed in 69% of patients (25 of 36), and mean pain levels recorded on inflation of the balloon were distressing according to the VDS and 4.8 +/- 1.4 (range, 2.3-7.5) according to the VAS. In the clamp group, RUG was successfully performed in all cases; in 69% of patients in this group (38 of 55), the pain level recorded at external compression was no pain according to the VDS and 0 according to the VAS, while mean values in the remaining 31% of patients (17 of 55) were mild pain on the VDS and 0.6 +/- 0.3 (range, 0.3-1.2) on the VAS. Bladder filling for VCUG was achieved with drip infusion in 96% of patients (69 of 72) in an average time of 11 minutes.
The conventional balloon method of performing RUG is painful and, in some cases, not effective. The clamp method is a simple, well-tolerated procedure that allowed diagnostic evaluation in all cases. Drip infusion enables RUG and VCUG to be performed without the need for syringes or bladder catheters, thus increasing patient comfort. |
---|---|
AbstractList | To compare examination adequacy and patient discomfort during retrograde urethrography (RUG) performed by using the conventional balloon method versus those of RUG and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) performed with the clamp method of using drip infusion for the administration of contrast material.
This prospective study was approved by the institutional review board; written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Eighty men (mean age, 64.3 years +/- 16 [standard deviation]; range, 18-85 years) suspected of having urethral stenosis were randomly distributed into two groups for urethrography: a control group (n = 36) and a clamp group (n = 44). In 11 of the 36 patients in the control group, the conventional balloon method could not be used, so these patients were transferred to the clamp group. Drip infusion was used to administer contrast material for RUG, and, except in cases where a suprapubic catheter was used (n = 8), for VCUG. The pain levels reported by patients were recorded by using a verbal descriptor scale (VDS) and a visual analogue scale (VAS).
In the control group, RUG was successfully performed in 69% of patients (25 of 36), and mean pain levels recorded on inflation of the balloon were distressing according to the VDS and 4.8 +/- 1.4 (range, 2.3-7.5) according to the VAS. In the clamp group, RUG was successfully performed in all cases; in 69% of patients in this group (38 of 55), the pain level recorded at external compression was no pain according to the VDS and 0 according to the VAS, while mean values in the remaining 31% of patients (17 of 55) were mild pain on the VDS and 0.6 +/- 0.3 (range, 0.3-1.2) on the VAS. Bladder filling for VCUG was achieved with drip infusion in 96% of patients (69 of 72) in an average time of 11 minutes.
The conventional balloon method of performing RUG is painful and, in some cases, not effective. The clamp method is a simple, well-tolerated procedure that allowed diagnostic evaluation in all cases. Drip infusion enables RUG and VCUG to be performed without the need for syringes or bladder catheters, thus increasing patient comfort. PURPOSETo compare examination adequacy and patient discomfort during retrograde urethrography (RUG) performed by using the conventional balloon method versus those of RUG and voiding cystourethrography (VCUG) performed with the clamp method of using drip infusion for the administration of contrast material.MATERIALS AND METHODSThis prospective study was approved by the institutional review board; written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Eighty men (mean age, 64.3 years +/- 16 [standard deviation]; range, 18-85 years) suspected of having urethral stenosis were randomly distributed into two groups for urethrography: a control group (n = 36) and a clamp group (n = 44). In 11 of the 36 patients in the control group, the conventional balloon method could not be used, so these patients were transferred to the clamp group. Drip infusion was used to administer contrast material for RUG, and, except in cases where a suprapubic catheter was used (n = 8), for VCUG. The pain levels reported by patients were recorded by using a verbal descriptor scale (VDS) and a visual analogue scale (VAS).RESULTSIn the control group, RUG was successfully performed in 69% of patients (25 of 36), and mean pain levels recorded on inflation of the balloon were distressing according to the VDS and 4.8 +/- 1.4 (range, 2.3-7.5) according to the VAS. In the clamp group, RUG was successfully performed in all cases; in 69% of patients in this group (38 of 55), the pain level recorded at external compression was no pain according to the VDS and 0 according to the VAS, while mean values in the remaining 31% of patients (17 of 55) were mild pain on the VDS and 0.6 +/- 0.3 (range, 0.3-1.2) on the VAS. Bladder filling for VCUG was achieved with drip infusion in 96% of patients (69 of 72) in an average time of 11 minutes.CONCLUSIONThe conventional balloon method of performing RUG is painful and, in some cases, not effective. The clamp method is a simple, well-tolerated procedure that allowed diagnostic evaluation in all cases. Drip infusion enables RUG and VCUG to be performed without the need for syringes or bladder catheters, thus increasing patient comfort. |
Author | Berná-Serna, Juan D Berná-Mestre, Juan D Aparicio-Mesón, Martín Canteras-Jordana, Manuel |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Juan D surname: Berná-Mestre fullname: Berná-Mestre, Juan D email: mesjubermu@hotmail.com organization: Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Salamanca, Paseo San Vicente s/n, 37007 Salamanca, Spain. mesjubermu@hotmail.com – sequence: 2 givenname: Juan D surname: Berná-Serna fullname: Berná-Serna, Juan D – sequence: 3 givenname: Martín surname: Aparicio-Mesón fullname: Aparicio-Mesón, Martín – sequence: 4 givenname: Manuel surname: Canteras-Jordana fullname: Canteras-Jordana, Manuel |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19561259$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNpFkDtPwzAYRS1URB_wA1hQJrYUP2OHCVTxkiqx0NlynC8kKLGDnVTqvyeolTrd5dyrq7NEM-cdIHRL8JoQrh6CKRvfrqmgFCuKM36BFkRQmRJGxAwtMGYsVZzkc7SM8QdjwoWSV2hOcpERKvIFetoFGOrgv4Pp60PSuKQD95hY7_bghsY70yYD2No1vyMkewhxjIltTddP4FD78hpdVqaNcHPKFdq9vnxt3tPt59vH5nmbWpaJIWUV5ZkCY5QouCSQlzkXsjAlFkoRiXnBCo45txbTqsyElUoZS3PJcFUxatkK3R93--CnK3HQXRMttK1x4MeoM8kZlTmdQHIEbfAxBqh0H5rOhIMmWP9r00dt-qxt6tydxseig_LcOHlifyEua6g |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1016_S1761_3310_22_47081_2 crossref_primary_10_1259_bjr_20211034 crossref_primary_10_1002_tre_957 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_urology_2015_12_086 crossref_primary_10_1038_nrurol_2009_165 crossref_primary_10_1186_s12894_023_01328_0 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00261_019_02127_8 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_urology_2011_01_071 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00330_017_5211_3 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_juro_2013_04_024 crossref_primary_10_1007_s00256_013_1600_0 crossref_primary_10_1016_S1636_5577_23_48169_2 crossref_primary_10_1007_s40137_023_00365_w crossref_primary_10_3390_app11031006 crossref_primary_10_1111_iju_14779 |
Cites_doi | 10.1111/j.1440-1673.1997.tb00458.x 10.1148/rg.24si045504 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)68829-5 10.1007/s00330-002-1758-7 10.1080/02841850802631991 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)70926-3 10.1007/s00330-002-1662-1 10.1016/0090-4295(81)90026-1 10.1007/s10140-008-0773-7 10.3109/00016922909133867 10.2147/MDER.S3944 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | (c) RSNA, 2009. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: (c) RSNA, 2009. |
DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM AAYXX CITATION 7X8 |
DOI | 10.1148/radiol.2522082064 |
DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE MEDLINE - Academic |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1527-1315 |
EndPage | 246 |
ExternalDocumentID | 10_1148_radiol_2522082064 19561259 |
Genre | Randomized Controlled Trial Journal Article Comparative Study |
GroupedDBID | --- .55 .GJ 123 18M 1CY 1KJ 29P 2WC 34G 39C 4.4 476 53G 5RE 6NX 6PF 7FM AAEJM AAQQT AAWTL ABHFT ABOCM ACFQH ACGFO ACJAN ACRZS ADBBV AENEX AENYM AFFNX AFOSN AJJEV AJWWR ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS BAWUL CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIK DU5 E3Z EBS ECM EIF EJD F5P F9R G8K GX1 H13 I4R J5H KO8 L7B LMP LSO MJL MV1 N4W NPM OK1 P2P R.V RKKAF RXW SJN TAE TR2 TRS TWZ W8F WH7 WOQ X7M YQI YQJ ZGI ZKG ZVN ZXP AAYXX CITATION 7X8 |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c365t-3f2468eaa85b471e9d9457bad05881704b3b4044cc02fd65c788ac29730ff32c3 |
ISSN | 0033-8419 |
IngestDate | Fri Aug 16 07:17:31 EDT 2024 Fri Aug 23 01:42:23 EDT 2024 Sat Sep 28 07:55:46 EDT 2024 |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 1 |
Language | English |
License | (c) RSNA, 2009. |
LinkModel | OpenURL |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c365t-3f2468eaa85b471e9d9457bad05881704b3b4044cc02fd65c788ac29730ff32c3 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-News-1 ObjectType-Feature-3 content type line 23 |
PMID | 19561259 |
PQID | 67432792 |
PQPubID | 23479 |
PageCount | 7 |
ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_67432792 crossref_primary_10_1148_radiol_2522082064 pubmed_primary_19561259 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2009-Jul 2009-07-00 20090701 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2009-07-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 07 year: 2009 text: 2009-Jul |
PublicationDecade | 2000 |
PublicationPlace | United States |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
PublicationTitle | Radiology |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Radiology |
PublicationYear | 2009 |
References | R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 R12 R11 R13 R1 |
References_xml | – ident: R12 – ident: R6 doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1673.1997.tb00458.x – ident: R1 doi: 10.1148/rg.24si045504 – ident: R7 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)68829-5 – ident: R2 doi: 10.1007/s00330-002-1758-7 – ident: R11 doi: 10.1080/02841850802631991 – ident: R5 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(17)70926-3 – ident: R9 doi: 10.1007/s00330-002-1662-1 – ident: R3 doi: 10.1016/0090-4295(81)90026-1 – ident: R13 doi: 10.1007/s10140-008-0773-7 – ident: R4 doi: 10.3109/00016922909133867 – ident: R10 doi: 10.2147/MDER.S3944 – ident: R8 |
SSID | ssj0014587 |
Score | 2.0755057 |
Snippet | To compare examination adequacy and patient discomfort during retrograde urethrography (RUG) performed by using the conventional balloon method versus those of... PURPOSETo compare examination adequacy and patient discomfort during retrograde urethrography (RUG) performed by using the conventional balloon method versus... |
SourceID | proquest crossref pubmed |
SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database |
StartPage | 240 |
SubjectTerms | Adolescent Adult Aged Catheterization - methods Contrast Media - administration & dosage Humans Male Middle Aged Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Urethral Stricture - diagnostic imaging Urography - methods Young Adult |
Title | Urethrography in men: conventional technique versus clamp method |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19561259 https://search.proquest.com/docview/67432792 |
Volume | 252 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV1Lb9NAEF6FIiEuiDfh6QMnJAdnH_aaE20CKkXmAInUm7Vej6Uc6lSJfeGn8GuZ8W6cpGklysWKrM0kmfkyntmdb4ax9ynn4woQvLoUmKCUsQgLaU2I-DAwTstxUhF3OPsRn87l2bk6Hwz-7FQttU0xsr-v5ZX8j1XxHtqVWLK3sGwvFG_ga7QvXtHCeP0nG89XQGMOXNNp2rnIoCvUmOyWks_6Lq1UgdGuaQ7mxSUupdHRu7HpT1Mu9jbZT2BVdwfp4zADIpU4Ggd6hOnomjW_wBPMriw5pkGHdrEkIbT0RNSeJdR075z2-Jx0Zjbr8AxTYuOEZaZufVn_ZnMi7QtZe4crRKil94rgfSxPwrFwLM6NE-aKH6DNu1TXzsk_nbnbsDx0_JLIDKtOUSMUxim0cf3R95tsX3n49SWJjqCtcyci34q4w-7yJFVULjr99r0_oZJKu36s_gf6E3MU8fHgW-zHPDckMl1AM3vIHvhMJDh2sHrEBlA_ZvcyX2vxhH3eQ1ewqANE16dgF1tBj63AYSvosBU4bD1l869fZpPT0M_bCK2IVROKCrWrwRitCoxZIC1TqZLClJHS1MdRFqKQkZTWRrwqY2UTrY2l4WdRVQluxTN2VC9reMECiX__UkSQWhVLsKAhLhTpwwC3tuJD9mGjkfzStVXJb7TAkL3b6CxH50cnWqaGZbvOiUFDHTCH7LlT5VYYEbYxtX95mw96xe5vQfyaHTWrFt5gzNkUbzvj_wX5QXxD |
link.rule.ids | 315,786,790,27955,27956 |
linkProvider | Flying Publisher |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Urethrography+in+Men%3A+Conventional+Technique+versus+Clamp+Method&rft.jtitle=Radiology&rft.au=Bern%C3%A1-Mestre%2C+Juan+D.&rft.au=Bern%C3%A1-Serna%2C+Juan+D.&rft.au=Aparicio-Mes%C3%B3n%2C+Mart%C3%ADn&rft.au=Canteras-Jordana%2C+Manuel&rft.date=2009-07-01&rft.issn=0033-8419&rft.eissn=1527-1315&rft.volume=252&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=240&rft.epage=246&rft_id=info:doi/10.1148%2Fradiol.2522082064&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1148_radiol_2522082064 |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0033-8419&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0033-8419&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0033-8419&client=summon |