Asian Pacific Journal of Health Sciences

Yazarlar: Göksel Bayar

Konular:-

DOI:10.21276/apjhs.2018.5.4.7

Anahtar Kelimeler:Interstitial cystitis,Hydrodistension,Repeating

Özet: Objective: To evaluate effect of second hydrodistension on symptoms of patients who have diagnosed interstitial cystitis and have been performed hydrodistension before. Material-Methods: Data of the patients who have diagnosed interstitial cystitis and were performed hydrodistension between June 2015 and June 2017 were retrospectively evaluated. Diagnosis of interstitial cystitis was done on three criteria according to clinical guidelines. Hydrodistension was performed by a single surgeon under spinal anesthesia. The bladder was distended with normal saline through a cystoscope to provide pressure of 80 cmH2O. After hydrodistension for 5 minutes the bladder was evacuated, which might lead to hemorrhage of the apparently normal bladder mucosa (glomerulations). O’Leary–Sant’s symptom and problem index (OS combined), Pelvic Pain and Urgency/Frequency (PUF) Patient Symptom Scale and the Likert visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were used to evaluate the severity of symptoms. After the hydrodistension, patients were followed-up by without medication. Second hydrodistension was performed when symptoms were recurred. Results: Total 17 patients were diagnosed interstitial cystitis. Symptoms of seven patients were not improved by first hydrodistension, so second hydrodistension was not performed to these patients. These seven patients were excluded. Total 10 patients were included the study. Median OS combined (24 vs 20.5 p= 0.356), PUF (33 vs 29 p= 0.113) and VAS (8 vs 7 p= 0.452) score were similar before and after second hydrodistension. Conclusions: Second hydrodistension is not effective in interstitial cystitis patients whom were treated hydrodistension before.

---