الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 99 |  |  |
| | | from | 99 | | |
Abstract
This study was done in the Urology Department at the Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University between 2011 and 2012. It was conducted to 45 patients, more than 45 years old presented with LUTS.
This study aims to increase safety of urologic care provided to men with lower urinary tract symptoms.
The objective of the study to assess reliability and reproducibility of abdominal ultrasonography in measurement of PVR
The patients were asked to present with a full bladder and they were examined immediately after voiding. PVR was measured by bladder ultrasound by urologist and radiologist then it was measured by urethral catheter and to be repeated after one week.
Limitation of the study:
Age of participated patient ≥ 45 year only.
Detrusor muscle not completely normal in all participated patients.
Not explained to participated patient the term of full bladder.
Summary of results:
• We found a moderate degree of agreement between ultrasound & urethral catheter in measurement of PVR urine (table 5, 6, 7 and 8).
• The ultrasound was significantly not reliable (table 3 and 4) but reproducible with single or multiple examiners /single-tool (table 9, 10, 11 and 12).
• The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of abdominal ultrasound in the measurement of PVR urine with a 100 ml cut-off point of significant PVR urine were 66.6%, 100% and 86.7%, respectively (table 13).
• We found no fixed factor that can be used to correct the finding by the US to be similar to the volume obtained by the urethral catheter.
• Age of the patients, IPSS, QOL, Qmax and prostate size cannot be predictors of significant PVR urine (Table 16).
CONCLUSION
• Measurement of post voiding residual urine volume by ultrasonography is reproducible by either Urologist or Radiologist but not reliable ( search for correction factor to become reliable and highly sensitive in further studies in the future ).
• The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of abdominal ultrasound in the measurement of PVR urine with a 100 ml cut-off point of significant PVR urine were 66.6%, 100% and 86.7%, respectively. Thus it represents a noninvasive safer and more comfortable alternative to urethral catheterization in measuring PVR urine volume.
• Urethral catheter has a significant different measurement of post voiding residual urine versus ultrasonography.