Does the Combination of Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion and Bladder Outlet Obstruction Number Increase Test Accuracy According to Benign Prostatic Obstruction at the Individual Level? - Zdravlje, medicina, lijecenje, zdravstveni portal

Does the Combination of Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion and Bladder Outlet Obstruction Number Increase Test Accuracy According to Benign Prostatic Obstruction at the Individual Level?

Does the Combination of Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion and Bladder Outlet Obstruction Number Increase Test Accuracy According to Benign Prostatic Obstruction at the Individual Level?

Damir Aganovic, Alden Prcic, Osman Hadziosmanovic, Munira Hasanbegovic

Acta Inform Med. 2012; 20(3): 160-166

View PDF Fulltext


Objective: Determine diagnostic power and intercorrelation between bladder outlet obstruction number (BOON) and intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) as non-invasive predictors of infravesical obstruction in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic enlargement. Material and methods: Prospective study during 2009-2010 analyzed data of 110 patients with proven benign prostatic enlargement. Prostate volume and IPP were determined by transabdominal ultrasound, and patients underwent complete urodynamic studies (UDS). BOON was calculated using the formula: prostate volume (cc)-3 x Qmax (ml/s)-0.2 x mean voided volume (ml). Results: There is a statistically significant correlation between the values of IPP and BOON (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient rho=0.48, p=0.0001). BOON is a more sensitive (sensitivity 82.4%, specificity 66.1%), while IPP is a more specific factor (sensitivity 58.8%, specificity 81.4%) in the group-wise prediction of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO). Positive predictive value in the diagnosis of obstruction increases at the individual level combining the cut-off values for BOON>-30, with IPP>10 mm (PPV 86.8%). Owing to a good correlation of IPP with different definitions of urodynamic obstruction, IPP was included in the BOON formula instead of prostate volume. This number was arbitrarily called BOON2. The combination of IPP >10 mm and cut-off value for BOON2 >-50 showed that 88.6% of the patients were accurately classified in the zone of obstruction (mean IPP 14.9 mm), while BOON2<-50 carried a high NPV. Conclusion: The combination of cut-off values for BOON and IPP increases test accuracy according to BOO at the individual level, thus facilitating clinical decision making regarding diagnostics and optimal choice of therapy in patients with BPE. Owing to its good correlation with obstruction determinants, IPP can be included in the formula for BOON instead of prostate volume.


1. 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: 1509-1513.

2. Lee SW, Jeong Cho M, Kang JY, and YooT. Clinical and Urodynamic Significance of Morphological Differences in Intravesical Prostatic Protrusion Korean J Urol. 2010; 51(10): 694-699.

3. Reis LO, Barreior GC, Baracat J, Prudente A, D’Ancona CA. Intravesical protrusion of the prostate as a predictive method of bladder outlet obstruction, Inter Braz J Urol. 2008; 34(5): 627-637.

4. Franco G, De Nunzio C, Leonardo C, Tubaro A, Ciccariello M, De Dominicis C, Miano L, Laurenti C. Ultrasound assessment of intravesical prostatic protrusion and detrusor wall thickness – new standards for noninvasive bladder outlet obstruction diagnosis? J Urol. 2010; 183(6): 2270-2274.

5. Chia SJ, Heng CT, Chan SP and Foo KT. Correlation of intravesical prostatic protrusion with bladder outlet obstruction, BJU Inter. 2003; 91: 371-374.

6. Van Venrooij GEPM, Eckhardt MD, and Boon TA. Noninvasive assessment of prostatic obstruction in elderly men with lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology. 2004; 63: 476-480.

7. Schaefer W, Abrams P, Liao L, Mattiasson A, Pesce F, Spangberg A. et al. Good urodynamic practices: uroflowmetry, filling cystometry and pressure-flow studies. Neurourol Urodyn. 2002; 21: 261-274.

8. Schaefer W. Analysis of bladder-outlet function with the linearized passive urethral resistance relation, linPURR, and a disease-specific approach for grading obstruction: from complex to simple. World J Uro. 1995; 13: 47-58.

9. Griffits D, Hofner K, Mastrigt R, Rolema H, Spangberg A, Gleason D and the International Continence Society Subcommittee on Standardization Terminology of Pressure-Flow Studies: Standardization of terminology of lower urinary tract function: pressure-flow studies during voiding, urethral resistance and urethral obstruction. Neurourol Urodynam. 1997; 16 (suppl.): 1-22.

10. Griffiths D, van Mastrigt R, and Bosch R. Quantification of urethral resistance and bladder function during voiding, with special reference to the effects of prostate size reduction on urethral obstruction due to benign prostatic hyperplasia. Neurourol Urodyn. 1989; 8: 17-27.

11. Abrams P. Bladder outlet obstruction index, bladder contractility index and bladder voiding efficiency: three simple indices to define bladder voiding dysfunction. BJU Inter. 1999; 84: 14-15.

12. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988; 44: 837-845.

13. 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): 573-577.

14. Lieber MM, Jacobson DJ, McGree ME, St Sauver JL, Girman CJ, Jacobsen SJ. Intravesical prostatic protrusion in men in Olmsted County, Minnesota, J Urol. 2009: 182(6): 2819-2824.

15. Doo CK, Uh HS. Anatomic configuration of prostate obtained by noninvasive ultrasonography can predict clinical voiding parameters for determining BOO in men with LUTS. Urology. 2009; 73: 232-236.

16. Zhang P, Wu ZJ, Yang Y, Zhang XD. Applying bladder outlet obstruction number to predict bladder outlet obstruction of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2008; 46(15): 1156-1159, (abstract).

17. Aganovic D, Hadziosmanovic O, Prcic A, Kulovic B. The Significance of the Influence of Aging and Intravesical Obstruction Caused by Benign Prostatic Enlargement on Detrusor Impairment. Med Arh. 2012 Jun; 66(3): 185-189.

18. Aganovic D, Hasanbegovic M, Prcic A, Kulovac B, Hadziosmanovic O. Which is a Better Indicator of Bladder Outlet Obstruction in Patients with Benign Prostatic Enlargement – Intravesical Protrusion of Prostate or Bladder Wall Thickness? Med Arh. 2012; 66(5): in press.

19. Oelke M, Hofner K, Wiese B, Grunewald V, Jonas U. Increase in detrusor wall thickness indicates bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in men, Worl J Urol. 2002; 19: 443-452.

20. Prando A. Ultrasound assessment of intravesical prostatic protrusion and detrusor wall thickness-new standards for noninvasive bladder outlet obstruction diagnosis?. Int Braz J Urol. 2010; 36(6); 766 (editorial comment).

21. Homma Y. Pressure-flow studies in benign prostatic hyperplasia: to do or not to do for the patient? BJU Inter. 2001; 87: 19-23.

22. Aganovic D. The role of uroflowmetry in diagnosis of infravesical obstruction in the patients with benign prostatic enlargement. Med. Arh. 2004; 58(1): 109-112.

23. Botker-Rasmussen I, Bagi P, Jorgensen JB. Is bladder outlet obstruction normal in elderly men without lower urinary tract symptoms? Neurourol. Urodyn. 1999; 18: 545-551.

24. Ku JH, Cho SY and Oh SJ. Residual fraction as a parameter to predict bladder outlet obstruction in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. Inter J of Urol. 2009; 16: 739-744.

25. Abrams PH, Griffiths DJ. The assessment of prostatic obstruction from urodynamic measurements and from residual urine. Br J Urol. 1997; 51: 129-134.

26. McConnell JD, Barry MJ, Bruskewitz RC, Bueschen AJ, Denton SE, Holtgrewe HL et al. Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Diagnosis and Treatment. Quick Reference Guide for Clinicians. AHCPR publication no. 94-0583. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services: Rockville, MD, February 1994.

27. Rosier PF, de Wildt MJ, Wijkstra H, Debruyne FF, de la Rosette JJ. Clinical diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction in patients with benign prostatic enlargement and lower urinary tract symptoms: development and urodynamic validation of a clinical prostate score for the objective diagnosis of bladder outlet obstruction J Urol. 1996; 155(5): 1649-1654.

28. Ockrim JL, Laniado ME, Patel A, Tubaro A, St Clair Carter S. A probability based system for combining simple office parameters as a predictor of bladder outlet obstruction, J Urol. 2001; 166: 2221-2225.

29. Milicevic S, Bijelic R. Efficasy and Safety of Tamsulosin in the Treatment of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Med Arh. 2012 Jun; 66(3): 173-176.

Leave a reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>