ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Introduction: The 24-hour bladder diary is considered to be the gold standard for evaluating maximum voided volume (MVV). However, we observed that patients often have a greater MVV during office uroflowmetry than that seen in the bladder diary. The purpose of this study is to compare these two non-invasive methods by which MVV can be determined - at the time of uroflowmetry (Q-MVV), or by 24hour bladder diary (BD-MVV). Materials and Methods: This was an Institutional Review Board approved retrospective study of patients evaluated for LUTS who completed a 24hour bladder diary and contemporaneous uroflowmetry. For Q-MVV, the patient was instructed to wait to void until their bladder felt full. Sample means were compared, and Pearson's correlations were calculated between the Q-MVV and BD-MVV data across the total sample, women, and men. Results: Seven hundred seventy one patients with LUTS completed bladder diaries. Of these, 400 patients, 205 women and 195 men, had contemporaneous Q-MVV. Mean BD-MVV was greater than mean Q-MVV. However, Q-MVV was larger in a sizable minority of patients. There was a weak correlation between BD-MVV and Q-MVV. Furthermore, there was a difference ≥50% between Q-MVV and BD-MVV in 165 patients (41%). Conclusions: The data suggest that there is a difference between the two measurement tools, and that the BD-MVV was greater than Q-MVV. For a more reliable assessment of MVV, this study suggests that both Q-MVV and BD-MVV should be assessed and that the larger of the two values is a more reliable assessment of MVV.