4.2 Article

Neurogenic bladder in progressive supranuclear palsy: A comparison with Parkinson's disease and multiple system atrophy

Journal

NEUROUROLOGY AND URODYNAMICS
Volume 37, Issue 5, Pages 1724-1730

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/nau.23496

Keywords

neurogenic bladder; progressive supranuclear palsy; urodynamics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AimsProgressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) can present urinary symptoms, similar to other parkinsonian disorders. We investigated the urodynamic parameters of PSP and compared them with those of idiopathic Parkinson's disease (IPD) and multiple system atrophy (MSA) MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the urodynamic data in patients diagnosed with parkinsonian disorders (PSP, IPD, and MSA) presenting urinary symptoms. Clinical data, including onset age, duration, and severity, as well as treatment status of parkinsonian disorders and urinary symptoms were collected. ResultsA total of 131 patients (10 with PSP, 79 with IPD, and 42 with MSA) were included. The mean age and disease onset age of PSP patients were similar to those of IPD patients, but older than those of MSA patients. The disease duration until the onset of urinary symptoms in PSP patients was similar to that in MSA patients, but shorter than that in IPD patients. According to the urodynamic study, storage phase dysfunctions in PSP patients were similar to those in IPD or MSA patients. However, according to a pressure-flow study, PSP patients showed higher rates of voiding failure, as well as lower maximum flow rate, higher post-void residual volume, and higher proportions of impaired detrusor contraction than IPD patients, but rather similar to MSA patients. ConclusionsUrinary dysfunctions in PSP patients were as extensive as those with MSA, and were more severe than those with IPD, especially in the voiding phase. This may reflect the extensive degenerative process of neural structure in PSP patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available