Agreement between simple catheter method and 3D transperineal ultrasound for assessing urethral length measurement before stress urinary incontinence treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Optimal placement of periurethral material has an important role in treatment efficacy with stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The validity of methods for determining urethral length and the precise location of the mid-urethral complex for SUI treatment have been sparsely studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the agreement between urethral lengths measured with a catheter and by transperineal ultrasound. METHODS: Fifty-seven women with SUI or mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) with predominant stress symptoms were recruited. The urethral length was assessed with 3D transperineal ultrasound and measurements were taken offline from the postero-inferior margin of the pubic symphysis to the bladder neck. Then, it was measured with a foley catheter by another evaluator, blinded to the ultrasound data. The distance between the inflated balloon and the urethral meatus was considered. RESULTS: Thirty-three women (58%) had SUI and 24 (42%) had MUI. The mean urethral length evaluated with ultrasound and the catheter were 3.03 ± 0.34 cm and 3.02 ± 0.41 cm (P = 0.857), respectively. Agreement between the two methods as assessed by the intra-class correlation coefficient was 0.90 (CI0.82-0.94, P ≤ 0.001). Limits of agreement (Bland-Altman) were +0.46 to -0.45 cm, with a mean difference of -0.01 ± 0.23 cm. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this study, reveal an excellent agreement between a simple catheter technique and ultrasound assessment for measuring urethral length, with a small mean bias and clinically acceptable limits of agreement. This provides relevant information in clinical practice for determining optimal placement of periurethral material or mid-urethral tape for SUI treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".