A CORRELATION BETWEEN INTRAVESICLE PROSTATIC PROTRUSION AND PROSTATE VOLUME IN PATIENTS PRESENTING WITH ACUTE URINARY RETENTION – A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY

GAURAV BAJPAI; SAHIL GAMBHIR; BHERU SINGH HARIYAWAT

doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2023v16i9.47823

Authors

GAURAV BAJPAI Department of General Surgery, RNT Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
SAHIL GAMBHIR Department of General Surgery, RNT Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2364-3052
BHERU SINGH HARIYAWAT Department of General Surgery, RNT Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2023v16i9.47823

Keywords:

Acute Urinary Retention (AUR), Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion (IPP), Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH)

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the study was to study the prevalence of significant intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) in patients presenting with acute urinary retention (AUR) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia and to study the correlation between IPP and prostatic volume.

Methods: Forty men between 45 and 85 years of age, who presented with AUR. Initial assessment included detailed clinical history, International Prostate Symptom Score, and Quality of Life assessments, and a transabdominal ultrasonogram to measure Prostate Volume (PV) and IPP. IPP is measured by drawing a line corresponding to bladder base on a sagittal view and perpendicularly measuring the distance from the bladder base to the greatest protrusion of the prostate into the bladder. Patients with IPP >10 mm were taken to have significant IPP and those ≤10 mm were taken to be insignificant. Statistical analysis included descriptive analysis and Pearson’s correlation coefficient.

Results: Of the 40 patients in our study with resented with AUR, 21 patients (52.5%) had significant IPP. Mean IPP was 11.3 mm with a standard deviation of 5.49 mm. All patients with significant IPP had a severe IPPS grade. IPP had a statistically significant correlation with PV.

Conclusion: The IPP assessed by transabdominal ultrasound can be used to direct appropriate patients to more aggressive treatment strategies like surgery.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Hossain AK, Alam AK, Habib AK, Rashid MM, Rahman H, Islam AK, et al. Comparison between prostate volume and intravesical prostatic protrusion in detecting bladder outlet obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull. 2012;38(1):14-7.

Muruganandham K, Dubey D, Kapoor R. Acute urinary retention in benign prostatic hyperplasia: Risk factors and current management. Indian J Urol. 2007;23(4):347-53.

Thomas K, Oades G, Taylor-Hay C, Kirby RS. Acute urinary retention: what is the impact on patients' quality of life? BJU Int. 2005;95(1):72-6.

Gyawali P, Shrestha G, Joshi B, Chalise P, Sharma U. Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion is better than Prostate Volume in Predicting Symptom Severity in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Prospective Clinical Study. Post-Graduate Medical Journal of NAMS. 2010;10(02).

Lim KB, Ho H, Foo KT, Wong MY, Fook-Chong S. Comparison of intravesical prostatic protrusion, prostate volume and serum prostatic- specific antigen in the evaluation of bladder outlet obstruction. Int J Urol. 2006;13(12):1509-13.

Nose H, Foo KT, Lim KB, Yokoyama T, Ozawa H, Kumon H. Accuracy of two noninvasive methods of diagnosing bladder outlet obstruction using ultrasonography: intravesical prostatic protrusion and velocity-flow video urodynamics. Urology. 2005;65(3):493-7.

Kim KH, Kim YS. Correlation of male overactive bladder with intravesical prostatic protrusion. Korean J Urol. 2010;51(12):843-6.

Keqin Z, Zhishun X, Jing Z, Haixin W, Dongqing Z, Benkang S. Clinical significance of intravesical prostatic protrusion in patients with benign prostatic enlargement. Urology. 2007;70(6):1096-9.

Lee LS, Sim HG, Lim KB, Wang D, Foo KT. Intravesical prostatic protrusion predicts clinical progression of benign prostatic enlargement in patients receiving medical treatment. Int J Urol. 2010;17(1):69-74.

Chia SJ, Heng CT, Chan SP, Foo KT. Correlation of intravesical prostatic protrusion with bladder outlet obstruction. BJU Int. 2003;91(4):371-4.

Cumpanas AA, Botoca M, Minciu R, Bucuras V. Intravesical prostatic protrusion can be a predicting factor for the treatment outcome in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic obstruction treated with tamsulosin. Urology. 2013;81(4):859-63.

Mariappan P, Brown DJ, McNeill AS. Intravesical prostatic protrusion is better than prostate volume in predicting the outcome of trial without catheter in white men presenting with acute urinary retention: a prospective clinical study. J Urol. 2007;178(2):573-7.

Franco G, De Nunzio C, Leonardo C, Tubaro A, Ciccariello M, De Dominicis C, et al. Ultrasound assessment of intravesical prostatic protrusion and detrusor wall thickness--new standards for noninvasive bladder outlet obstruction diagnosis? J Urol. 2010;183(6):2270-4.

Lee JM, Chung H, Kim T-W, Kim HS, Wang JH, Yang S-K. The correlation of intravesical prostatic protrusion with storage symptoms, as measured by transrectal ultrasound. Korean Journal of Urology. 2008;49(2):145-9.

Reis LO, Barreiro GC, Baracat J, Prudente A, D'Ancona CA. Intravesical protrusion of the prostate as a predictive method of bladder outlet obstruction. Int Braz J Urol. 2008;34(5):627-33; discussion 34-7.

Kuo HC. Clinical prostate score for diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction by prostate measurements and uroflowmetry. Urology. 1999;54(1):90-6.