The effect of a 6 Fr catheter in women: Are they obstructive?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to evaluate the effect of a 6 Fr transurethral catheter on the uroflowmetry and to assess whether it potentially contributes to the bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in women. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of 1367 women who underwent an urodynamic study. We included patients with a non-invasive free-flow study (NIFFS) and pressure flow study (PFS) performed through a 6 Fr double lumen transurethral catheter. RESULTS: In total, 120 women met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Mean maximal flow rate (Qmax) was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the NIFFS (27.2±11.1 mL/s) than in the PFS (19.3±10.6 mL/s). The mean difference between both Qmax was 7.9±12.0 mL/s. Of these women, 92.3% (24/26) with a Qmax <12 mL/s during PFS were found to have a Qmax ≥12 mL/s during the NIFFS. Ten of the 72 women with an available Pdet.Qmax were deemed to have a BOO according to the PFS and all of them had a Qmax >12 mL/s during the NIFFS. Of the 10 patients, only 2 reported obstructive symptoms. CONCLUSION: The presence of 6 Fr transurethral catheters alters the PFS and results in a significant reduction of the Qmax in patients who voided more than 250 mL. We believe that NIFFS should be performed in all patients before any urethral manipulation to lower a possible overdiagnosis of BOO and findings should always be correlated to clinical symptoms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".