A Comparison of Suprapubic and Transurethral Catheterization on Postoperative Urinary Retention after Vaginal Prolapse Repair: A Randomized Controlled TrialStekkinger E. · van der Linden P.J.Q.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Deventer Ziekenhuis, Deventer, The Netherlands
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Article / Publication Details
Aim: To compare the effect of suprapubic and transurethral catheterization on postvoid residual volumes (PRVs) after cystocele repair. Methods: 126 women who underwent pelvic organ prolapse surgery including cystocele repair were randomized to suprapubic or transurethral catheterization. At the third postoperative day, PRVs were measured. The number of women with PRV >150 ml, need for prolonged catheterization, recatheterization, length of hospital stay, frequency of urinary tract infections and complications were determined. Results: PRVs exceeded 150 ml in 13 out of 64 (20%) and 14 out of 62 (23%) women in the suprapubic and transurethral group, respectively (p = 0.76). In the suprapubic group a higher rate of urine leakage was noted (27 vs. 7%, p = 0.003). 10 women (16%) allocated to the suprapubic group switched to transurethral catheterization, because of problems with the suprapubic catheter. No protocol deviations were reported in the transurethral group. Of the women in both groups, 9% developed urinary tract infections (p = 0.93). Conclusions: Suprapubic catheterization was comparable to transurethral catheterization in the prevention of postoperative voiding dysfunction after vaginal prolapse surgery, but it was associated with a higher rate of complications.
© 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.