Kuhn, Annette; Bank, Sybille; Robinson, Dudley; Klimek, Miriam; Kuhn, Peter; Raio, Luigi (2010). How should bladder wall thickness be measured? A comparison of vaginal, perineal and abdominal ultrasound. Neurourology and urodynamics, 29(8), pp. 1393-6. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley-Liss 10.1002/nau.20876
Full text not available from this repository.Measurement of bladder wall thickness using transvaginal ultrasound has previously been shown to discriminate between women with diagnosed detrusor overactivity and those with urodynamic stress incontinence. So far, no comparison has been made between abdominal, perineal and vaginal route for the measurement of bladder wall thickness. The aim of this prospective study was to determine if abdominal, perineal and vaginal ultrasound measurements of bladder wall thickness are comparable with each other.
Item Type: |
Journal Article (Original Article) |
|---|---|
Division/Institute: |
04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Gynaecology, Paediatrics and Endocrinology (DFKE) > Clinic of Gynaecology |
UniBE Contributor: |
Kuhn, Annette, Raio, Luigi |
ISSN: |
0733-2467 |
Publisher: |
Wiley-Liss |
Language: |
English |
Submitter: |
Factscience Import |
Date Deposited: |
04 Oct 2013 14:13 |
Last Modified: |
05 Dec 2022 14:02 |
Publisher DOI: |
10.1002/nau.20876 |
PubMed ID: |
20976813 |
Web of Science ID: |
000284016900006 |
URI: |
https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/3146 (FactScience: 206617) |
Actions (login required)
 |
Edit item |