Risk Of Postoperative Urinary Retention Research Articles

A multicenter retrospective cohort study comparing urethral diverticulectomy with and without pubovaginal sling

Urethral diverticulum is a rare entity and requires a high suspicion for diagnosis based on symptoms and physical exam with confirmation by imaging. A common presenting symptom is stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The recommended treatment is surgical excision withurethral diverticulectomy. Postoperatively, approximately 37% of patients may have persistent and 16% may have de novo SUI. An autologous fascial pubovaginal sling (PVS) placed at the time of urethral diverticulectomy (UD) has the potential to prevent and treat postoperative SUI. However, little has been published about the safety and efficacy of a concomitant pubovaginal sling. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical presentation, outcomes, complications, and diverticulum recurrence rates in women who underwent a urethral diverticulectomy with vs without a concurrent pubovaginal sling. This multicenter, retrospective cohort study included women who underwent a urethral diverticulectomy between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2016. Study participants were identified by Current Procedure Terminology codes, and their records were reviewed for demographics, medical or surgical history, symptoms, preoperative testing, concomitant surgeries, and postoperative outcomes. Symptoms, recurrence rates, and complications were compared between women with and without a concomitant pubovaginal sling. The primary outcome was the presence of postoperative stress urinary incontinence symptoms. Based on a stress urinary incontinence rate of 50% with no pubovaginal sling and 10% with a pubovaginal sling, we needed a sample size of 141 participants who underwent diverticulectomy without a pubovaginal sling and 8 participants with a pubovaginal sling to achieve 83% power with P<.05. We identified 485 diverticulectomy cases from 11 institutions who met the inclusion criteria; of these, 96 (19.7%) cases had a concomitant pubovaginal sling. Women with a pubovaginal sling were older than those without a pubovaginal sling (53 years vs 46 years; P<.001), and a greater number of women with pubovaginal sling had undergone diverticulectomy previously (31% vs 8%; P<.001). Postoperative follow-up period (14.6±26.9 months) was similar between the groups. The pubovaginal sling group had greater preoperative stress urinary incontinence (71% vs 33%; P<.0001), dysuria (47% vs 30%; P=.002), and recurrent urinary tract infection (49% vs 33%; P=.004). The addition of a pubovaginal sling at the time of diverticulectomy significantly improved the odds of stress urinary incontinence resolution after adjusting for prior diverticulectomy, prior incontinence surgery, age, race, and parity (adjusted odds ratio, 2.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-5.03; P=.043). It was not significantly protective against de novo stress urinary incontinence (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-2.92; P=.807). Concomitant pubovaginal sling increased the odds of postoperative short-term (<6 weeks) urinary retention (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-6.22; P=.039) and long-term urinary retention (>6 weeks) (adjusted odds ratio, 6.98; 95% confidence interval, 2.20-22.11; P=.001), as well as recurrent urinary tract infections (adjusted odds ratio, 3.27; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-7.76; P=.013). There was no significant risk to develop a de novo overactive bladder (adjusted odds ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-3.91; P=.423) or urgency urinary incontinence (adjusted odds ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-3.06; P=.30). A concomitant pubovaginal sling was not protective against a recurrent diverticulum (adjusted odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-2.82; P=.374). Overall, the diverticulum recurrence rate was 10.1% and did not differ between the groups. This large retrospective cohort study demonstrated a greater resolution of stress urinary incontinence with the addition of a pubovaginal sling at the time of a urethral diverticulectomy. There was aconsiderable risk of postoperative urinary retention and recurrent urinary tract infections in the pubovaginal sling group.

Incidence, Outcomes, and Prediction of Postoperative Urinary Retention After a Nonurologic Procedure.

Purpose:To develop a prognostic model to estimate postoperative urinary retention (POUR) after lower limb arthroplasty.Methods:One thousand two hundred twenty patients underwent 1,374 joint replacement operations (812 knees and 562 hips) between December 2008 and May 2014. Detailed variables were collected. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify the independent predictors for POUR. Boot strapping and stepwise elimination was used to design a predictive nomogram.Results:There were 124 incidents of POUR (9.02%) in 118 patients (90 knee, 34 hip, P = 0.001). On univariate analysis, patients who developed POUR were older (P < 0.001), had higher American Association of Anesthesiology scores (P = 0.007), underwent knee replacement (0.001), were obese (body mass index > 35) (P = 0.04), and were hypertensive (P = 0.029), with a history of benign prostatic hyperplasis (BPH) (P < 0.001) or neurologic disorders (P = 0.024). On multivariable analysis, age (60 to 69 years, P = 0.023, 70 to 79 yrs P = 0.008, >80 years P = 0.003), knee replacement (P = 0.014), and history of BPH (P = 0.013) were the independent predictors of POUR. A score was assigned to each predictor (total = 31). The C-index was 0.65. There were three risk categories as follows: 0 to 50, 51 to 85, and 86+ points resulting in 3.3%, 7.2%, and 14.0% risk of retention, respectively.Discussion:This nomogram reliably predicts the risk of POUR in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasties and may help planning preoperative interventions to decrease the risk of this complication.

Nomogram to Predict Risk of Postoperative Urinary Retention in Women Undergoing Pelvic Reconstructive Surgery.

To develop a nomogram that determines an individual's risk of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) following pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. We performed a retrospective chart review of women who underwent reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse and/or stress urinary incontinence. Short-term POUR was defined as failure of the trial of void (post-void residual >150 mL with a void of >200 mL) on postoperative day one or the need for re-catheterization in the first 2 postoperative days. Potential pre- and intraoperative risk factors for POUR were compared between patients with and without POUR. Multivariate binary logistic regression analysis with best-subsets variable selection was used to create a predictive nomogram. Most patients (275 of 332) had concomitant or combined procedures. The overall incidence of POUR was 31% (103 of 332 patients). The risk of POUR was higher for patients with high-grade anterior prolapse and those who had undergone anterior vaginal repair, vaginal hysterectomy, or a laparoscopic sling procedure. Patients who did not experience POUR tended to have fewer co-morbidities and were more likely to have undergone laparoscopic colposacropexy. Risk factors for POUR in the nomogram were diabetes, multiple medical co-morbidities, laparoscopic sling procedure, anterior vaginal repair, laparoscopic colposacropexy, and vaginal hysterectomy. The nomogram allows clinicians to calculate a patient's risk of POUR (range <10% to >80%). While the predictive nomogram in this study was developed using a single surgeon's case series and may not be generalizable to all surgeons, it demonstrates that the risk of POUR may be predicted based on clinical characteristics and the type of surgery performed. This kind of prediction model could help guide clinicians in preoperative patient counseling.

Comparison of spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia in inguinal hernia repair in adult: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundInguinal hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures. To date, there is no consensus on which anesthesia should be used. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of spinal anesthesia (SA) vs. general anesthesia (GA) in inguinal hernia repair in adults.MethodsEligible studies were identified before January 2020 from PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Scopus database as well as reference lists. Outcomes included surgery time, the time in the operation room, the length of hospital stay, pain scores, patient satisfaction, and postoperative complications. Subgroup analysis based on surgical approaches was conducted.ResultsSix randomized controlled trials (RCT) and five cohort studies were included. A total of 2593 patients were analyzed. Compared to GA, SA was associated with a longer surgery time (weighted mean difference [WMD]: − 3.28, 95%confident interval [CI]: − 5.76, − 0.81), particularly in laparoscopic repair. Postoperative pain at 4 h and 12 h were in favor of SA following either open or laparoscopic repairs (standard mean difference [SMD]: 1.58; 95%CI: 0.55, 2.61, SMD: 0.99, 95%CI: 0.37, 1.60, respectively); and considering borderline significance, patients receiving SA might be more satisfied with the anesthesia they used for herniorrhaphy (SMD: -0.32, 95%CI: − 0.70, 0.06). Some major complications of scrotal edema, seroma, wound infection, recurrence, shoulder pain were comparable between the two groups. However, patients receiving SA had an increased risk of postoperative urinary retention and headache when compared with GA (relative ratio [RR]: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.23, 0.86, RR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.92, respectively). There was a tendency that the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was lower in SA than GA (RR: 2.12, 95%CI: 0.95, 4.73), especially in open herniorrhaphy.ConclusionsSA can be another good choice for pain relief no matter in open or laparoscopic hernia repairs, but it can’t be confirmed that SA is better than GA.

Considering healthcare value and associated risk factors with postoperative urinary retention after elective laminectomy

BACKGROUNDMitigating common complications such as postoperative urinary retention (POUR) following elective spine surgery is prudent. Identifying patients at risk for POUR and recognizing associated factors, to avoid a more complicated postoperative episode should be a priority and easily achievable. Understanding the financial burden of complications, such as POUR, is also important for value-based healthcare, not only for providers, but for employers and payors as well. PURPOSEThe purpose of this study is to examine patient and surgical factors that may lead to increased risk for POUR and its associated cost following elective lumbar laminectomies. STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGThis is a retrospective study of the incidence of postoperative urinary retention after elective one- and two-level primary lumbar laminectomies. PATIENT SAMPLEWe followed patients undergoing one- and two-level primary elective lumbar laminectomies performed between April 2014 and December 2016. OUTCOME MEASURESPatient factors included age, gender, body-mass index, and comorbidities. Surgical factors included surgical time, intraoperative fluid volume requirements, anesthesia type, and surgical levels involved. Other outcome variables included length of stay, discharge disposition, 30-day all-cause readmissions and emergency department visits, 90-day complications, and variable direct costs. METHODSThe incidence of POUR was evaluated and compared with patient and surgical factors and cost-specific variables to identify correlations and potential risk for POUR after one- and two-level primary lumbar laminectomies. RESULTSAnalysis included 333 patients – 203 one-level laminectomies and 130 two-level laminectomies. The overall incidence of POUR was 17.4%. Age, male gender, and history of urinary retention were significantly associated with POUR. There was a significantly increased risk of POUR with increased surgical time, but not with anesthesia type. There were also no significant differences in body-mass index, other study comorbidities, intraoperative fluid requirements, readmission, emergency department visit, and complication rates between groups. On average, patients with POUR had a significantly longer length of stay than patients without POUR. In addition, more POUR patients were discharged to acute rehabilitation facilities and had higher average variable direct cost compared tonon-POUR patients. CONCLUSIONSPOUR is a significant risk after elective laminectomy. This study supports several widely accepted beliefs regarding POUR risk, while challenging others. It also highlights the burden of POUR development after surgery. At our institution, we developed a protocol supported by these findings.

Removal of a urinary catheter before discontinuation of epidural analgesia is associated with an increased risk of postoperative urinary retention and hospital episode costs in patients undergoing surgical correction for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

In adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients undergoing posterior spinal instrumented fusion (PSIF), we aimed to answer these questions: (1) is there a difference in postoperative urinary retention (UR) rates among patients who had removal of their Foley catheters before vs. after discontinuation of epidural analgesia (EA)? (2) Can the timing of Foley catheter removal be an independent risk factor for postoperative UR requiring recatheterization? (3) Is there an incurred cost related to treating UR? Retrospective cohort. EA has been widely used for postoperative pain control after PSIF for AIS. In these patients, removing the Foley catheter, inserted for intraoperative monitoring of urine output, is indicated in the early postoperative period. However, a controversy exists as to whether it should be removed before or after the EA has been discontinued. A single-institution, longitudinally maintained database was queried to identify 297 patients who met specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patient characteristics and the order and timing of removing the urinary and epidural catheters were collected. Rates of UR were statistically compared in patients who had early vs. late urinary catheter removal. A univariate and multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors. Hospital episode costs were analyzed. Patients who had early (n = 66, 22%) vs. late (n = 231, 78%) urinary catheter removal had a significantly higher incidence of UR requiring recatheterization (15 vs. 4.7%, p = 0.007). Patient with early removal were almost 4 times more likely to develop UR requiring recatheterization [odds ratio (OR) 3.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5-9.7, p = 0.005]. UR incurred additional costs averaging $15,000/patient (p = 0.204). In patients who had PSIF for AIS, removal of a urinary catheter before discontinuation of EA is an independent risk factor for UR, requiring recatheterization and associated with increased cost. III.

Incidence of and risk factors for postoperative urinary retention in men after carotid endarterectomy

ObjectiveThe goal of this study was to determine the incidence of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) in men after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and to identify preventable risk factors for the development of this complication. MethodsAll male patients who underwent CEA from 2014 to June 2018 were identified. Exclusions included CEA with concomitant cardiac surgery, baseline dialysis, and indwelling or straight catheterization. POUR was the primary end point, defined as inability to void requiring catheterization within 24 hours postoperatively or after removal of a preoperatively placed Foley catheter. POUR was further classified as mild (single catheterization), moderate (multiple catheterizations), or severe (catheterization prolonging discharge or discharge with catheter). Logistic regression assessed for POUR risk factors. ResultsThere were 294 male patients who underwent CEA during the study period; 82 (28.2%) developed POUR. Of these, 48 (57.8%) were mild, 15 (18.1%) were moderate, and 20 (24.1%) were severe. At baseline, POUR was associated with older age, peripheral artery disease (PAD), chronic kidney disease, diabetes, ambulation deficit, prior urinary retention, and statin and chronic tamsulosin use. Overall, 31.6% (93) of the cohort had a Foley catheter placed before the procedure, and this was protective against POUR (no Foley vs Foley, 31.8% vs 20.4%; P = .043). Independent risk factors for POUR included prior urinary retention (odds ratio [OR], 3.4 [1.6-7.3]; P = .002), diabetes (OR, 2.1 [1.1-3.7]; P = .016), PAD (OR, 2.3 [1.1-5.2]; P = .036), and age (per year: OR, 1.1 [1.02-1.10]; P < .001). Preoperative Foley catheter placement remained protective (OR, 0.4 [0.2-0.7]; P = .003). Preoperative Foley catheter placement was not associated with urinary tract infection (preoperative Foley catheter: 0% vs 1%; P = .54). However, POUR was associated with an increased risk for urinary tract infections (10% vs 1%; P = .001), which was highest in severe POUR (20% vs 1%; P = .001). POUR was also associated with a discharge to rehabilitation (16% vs 4%; P = .002), with highest rates in the moderate and severe POUR cohorts (20% each). ConclusionsPOUR is common in men undergoing CEA, and almost a quarter of those with POUR have a discharge delay or are discharged with a Foley catheter. Preoperative Foley catheterization is protective against POUR and should be considered in older patients, diabetics, patients with PAD, and those with a history of urinary retention.

Early removal of urinary drainage in patients receiving epidural analgesia after colorectal surgery within an ERAS protocol is feasible.

ERAS guidelines recommend early removal of urinary drainage after colorectal surgery to reduce the risk of catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI). Another recommendation is the postoperative use of epidural analgesia (EA). In many types of surgery, EA was shown to increase the risk of postoperative urinary retention (POUR). This study determines the impact of early urinary catheter removal on the incidence of POUR and CAUTI under EA after colorectal surgery. Eligible patients were scheduled for colorectal surgery within the local ERAS protocol between April 2015 and September 2016. Urinary drainage was removed on the first postoperative day while EA was still in place (early removal group (ER)). The incidences of POUR and CAUTIs were recorded prospectively. Results were compared with a historical control (CG), which was operated between October 2013 and March 2015. POUR occurred significantly more often in the ER (ER 7.8%; CG 2.6%), while CAUTIs were significantly less frequent in the ER (13.8%) compared with the CG (30.4%). Patients who developed POUR were characterised by a significantly higher rate of abdominoperineal resections, by a higher frequency of rectal cancer, and a higher male-to-female ratio compared with patients who did not develop POUR. Early removal of urinary drainage after colorectal surgery while EA is still in place is feasible; it reduces the incidence of CAUTI but increases the risk of POUR. Thus, screening for POUR in patients with failure to void after six to 8 h is mandatory under these clinical conditions.

1289 Urinary Retention Following Outpatient Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy

Study Objective Identify risk factors associated with postoperative urinary retention in patients undergoing minimally invasive outpatient hysterectomy. Design Retrospective cohort study Setting Academic medical center Patients or Participants All patients undergoing outpatient minimally invasive hysterectomy between January, 2013 to July, 2018 were considered for inclusion. Interventions Outpatient laparoscopic, vaginal, or robotically-assisted-laparoscopic hysterectomy. Measurements and Main Results A total of 543 patients met inclusion criteria. Postoperative urinary retention occurred in 175 patients (cases) and 368 patients successfully passed their voiding trial in the postanesthesia care unit (controls), for a pass rate of 68%. Cases were older (mean age 54.5 years, SD=11.9 vs. 49 years SD=10.2, p Conclusion In patients undergoing minimally invasive outpatient hysterectomy, performing concomitant FPMRS procedures, having a longer operating time, and increased perioperative narcotic use is shown to increase the risk of postoperative urinary retention. The rate of urinary tract infection is higher in patients who experience postoperative urinary retention.

Would early removal of indwelling catheter effectively prevent urinary retention after hip fracture surgery in elderly patients?

BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the incidence and risk factors of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) among elderly patients who underwent hip fracture surgery and to evaluate the effect of indwelling catheterization on the occurrence of POUR.Materials and methodsFrom January 2012 to January 2015, consecutive patients aged over 70 years who underwent hip fracture surgery were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent indwelling catheterization due to voiding difficulty upon admission. Demographic data, perioperative variables, and postoperative duration of patient-controlled analgesia and indwelling catheterization, postoperative complications, and mortality were collected. The incidence of POUR was investigated, and the risk factors related to POUR were analyzed using a logistic regression analysis. The cutoff value for the timing of catheter removal was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.ResultsPOUR developed in 68 patients (31.8%) of the 214 patients. Of these, 24 (35.3%) were male. The indwelling catheter was left in place for an average of 3.4 days (range, 0–7 days) postoperatively. A significant difference was noted in gender and duration of indwelling catheterization between patients with POUR and without. The cutoff value for the timing of catheter removal as determined by ROC curve analysis was 3.5 postoperative day with 51.4% sensitivity and 71.5% specificity. Multiple logistic regression revealed that the duration of the indwelling catheter [odds ratios (OR), 0.31; p = 0.016)] and male gender (OR, 2.22; p = 0.014) were independent risk factors related to the occurrence of POUR.ConclusionsThe significant risk factors of POUR among elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery were early indwelling catheter removal and male gender. Therefore, early removal of indwelling catheter in elderly patients following hip fracture surgery may increase the risk of POUR, especially in male patients.

Predictors of Postoperative Urinary Retention in Outpatient Minimally Invasive Hysterectomy

To identify risk factors associated with postoperative urinary retention in patients undergoing outpatient minimally invasive hysterectomy. A retrospective cohort study. An academic medical center. All patients undergoing outpatient minimally invasive hysterectomy between January 2013 and July 2018 were considered for inclusion in the study. Outpatient laparoscopic, vaginal, or robotically assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. Four hundred forty-four patients met the inclusion criteria. Postoperative urinary retention occurred in 94 patients, and 347 patients successfully passed their voiding trial in the postanesthesia care unit for a pass rate of 79%. Demographic characteristics were similar, except patients who experienced postoperative urinary retention were less likely to be menopausal (23.4% vs 34.7%, p = .038). Those with urinary retention received more perioperative opioids (morphine milligram equivalent of 14.4 mg vs11.2 mg, p = .012), had longer operative times (122.9 ± 55.6 vs 95.7 ± 42.3 minutes, p < .01), and experienced more blood loss (105.3 ± 134.4 vs 78.5 ± 86.8 mL, p = .025). The rate of urinary tract infections was similar. Logistic regression analysis showed that the route of hysterectomy and age were not associated with an increased risk for urinary retention, whereas a longer operative time and higher doses of perioperative opioid use were. In patients undergoing minimally invasive outpatient hysterectomy, a longer operative time and increased perioperative narcotic use increases the risk of postoperative urinary retention.

Does spinal anesthesia lead to postoperative urinary retention in same-day urogynecology surgery? A retrospective review.

Spinal anesthesia has been reported to be a risk factor for postoperative urinary retention (POUR) in various surgical specialties. We hypothesized that spinal anesthesia was a risk factor for POUR after outpatient vaginal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). This was a retrospective review of an urogynecology database for all outpatient POP vaginal surgeries performed in 2014 to evaluate the risk of POUR after general versus spinal anesthesia. A standardized voiding trial was performed by backfilling the bladder with 300ml of saline. A successful trial was achieved if the patient voided two-thirds of the total volume instilled, confirmed by bladder ultrasound. Our primary outcome was to compare POUR requiring discharge with a Foley catheter between spinal and general anesthesia. Multivariate logistic regression was performed for variables with significance at p < 0.1 at the bivariate level. A total of 177 procedures were included, 126 with general and 51 with spinal anesthesia. The overall POUR rate was 48.9%. Type of anesthesia was not a risk factor for POUR. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that age < 55years (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-11.7), diabetes (adjusted OR 4.18, 95% CI 1.04-21.67), and having a cystocele ≥ stage2 (adjusted OR 4.23, 95% CI 1.89-10) were risk factors for developing POUR. Acute urinary retention after outpatient vaginal pelvic floor surgery can vary by procedure, but overall is 48.9%. Spinal anesthesia does not contribute to POUR, but rates are higher in those women that are younger than 55years of age, have a cystocele ≥ stage2 preoperatively, and a history of diabetes.

Reducing postoperative catheterisation after anterior colporrhaphy from 48 to 24h: a randomised controlled trial.

There is a distinct lack of literature on postoperative management after anterior colporrhaphy (AC). Our traditional postoperative protocol consisted of 24h of indwelling catheterisation followed by 24h of self-intermittent catheterisation. We hypothesised that a new protocol consisting of only 24h of indwelling catheterisation might produce better results without additional complications. From April 2014 to July 2017, all candidates for AC were randomised to catheter removal 24 or 48h after surgery. The primary outcome was the postoperative urinary retention (POUR) rate. Secondary outcomes included: asymptomatic bacteriuria (AB), urinary tract infection (UTI) and postoperative pain after 24h. A total of 79 patients were recruited. Thirty-seven and 40 patients were randomised to follow the 48-h protocol and the 24-h protocol respectively. There were no significant differences in relation to the POUR rate: 3 patients (8.1%) vs 1 (2.5%) in the 48-h vs the 24-h group respectively (p = 0.346). The UTI rate was 2 (8.1%) vs 0 patients respectively (p = 0.139) and the postoperative AB rate was 3 (9.1%) vs 0 patients (p = 0.106). In the postoperative pain evaluation, the visual analogue scale score was significantly higher in the 48h group (0.35 vs 0.13, p = 0.02). According to our results, reducing the catheterisation from 48 to 24h after AC does not increase the risk of POUR and decreases the rate of UTI, AB and postoperative pain. This new postoperative management protocol of pelvic floor surgery would improve postoperative outcomes and shorten the stay in hospital.

Effects of dexamethasone on postoperative urinary retention after laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair.

Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a complication of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR). Previous research has identified predictive factors of POUR, such as age and history of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). There is currently limited work on preventative measures. We hypothesize dexamethasone, a steroid, reduces POUR rates following LIHR due to its mechanism. Consecutive patients (n = 979) undergoing LIHR from 2009 to 2017 at a single institution were selected from a prospectively managed database. All procedures were performed by four general surgeons. Only male patients were selected, as the majority of POUR occurs in males. Patients were retroactively chart reviewed and divided into two groups, dexamethasone use (n = 623) and no dexamethasone use (n = 356). Perioperative factors were compared between groups with Chi-square and independent samples t tests. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess whether dexamethasone use was associated with POUR. A subgroup analysis was performed on the dexamethasone group to determine any dose-dependent effects. We found a significant difference in POUR between the dexamethasone group and no dexamethasone group (3.7% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.0001). Patients in the dexamethasone group had a shorter length of stay, and were less likely to have BPH or a Foley placed (all p < 0.05). Age and BMI were similar between groups. Multivariable analysis showed that the use of dexamethasone was associated with a reduced risk of POUR (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.2-0.97, p = 0.0386), while controlling for factors such as age and BPH. A subgroup analysis examined the effect of dexamethasone per unit (mg) increase. There was no significant association between dexamethasone dose and POUR rates (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.82-1.38, p = 0.6241). Patients who received dexamethasone showed a lower rate of POUR regardless of dose. These results suggest dexamethasone can be administered to reduce POUR in males undergoing LIHR.

Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: Is Routine Urinary Catheterization Still Mandatory in the Era of Enhanced Recovery?

ObjectiveTo assess the benefits and safety of noncatheterization during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy within an enhanced recovery protocol. Materials and MethodsA single-center retrospective comparative study was carried out of consecutive patients who underwent a robot-assisted partial nephrectomy between February 2015 and December 2017 within an early recovery program. The patients who received a urinary catheter were compared with those who did not in terms of postoperative complications, acute urinary retention rates, urinary tract infection rates, and lengths of hospital stay. ResultsOf the 145 patients who followed an early recovery program after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy in the study period, 96 received a urinary catheter and 49 did not. There was no significant difference between these 2 groups in terms of the rates of acute urinary retention (3% vs 6%, respectively; P = .393), urinary tract infection (3% vs 2%; P = .707), postoperative complications (14% vs 18%; P = .445), or readmissions within 30 days (8% vs 6%; P = .636). However, patients who did not receive a catheter had shorter initial and total (including readmissions) lengths of hospital stay (respectively 2.16 days vs 2.56 days; P = .058, and 2.27 days vs 3.40 days; P <.001). ConclusionOur findings challenge the routine use of urinary catheterization during robot-assisted partial nephrectomies. Noncatheterization does not seem to increase the risk of postoperative urinary retention. Only catheterizing specific at-risk patients may prove beneficial.

Identifying patients at risk for urinary retention following inguinal herniorrhaphy: a single institution study.

We aim to identify patients at risk for post-operative urinary retention (POUR) and factors associated with POUR. Males who underwent inguinal hernia repair (IHR) from June 2010 to September 2014at a single institution were grouped according to the presence (symptomatic) or absence (asymptomatic) of preoperative urogenital symptoms (UGS). Patients ≤ 18years of age were excluded. POUR was defined as the need to catheterize a patient who had not voided 6 h after surgery. Data were examined using IBM SPSS v23.0. Of the 60 asymptomatic and 30 symptomatic patients identified, no differences were seen in age (55 vs. 65, p = 0.13), length of stay > 1day (3% vs. 13%, p = 0.09), bilateral inguinal herniation (23% vs. 23%, p = 1.00), or laparoscopic approach (70% vs. 69%, p = 1.00); however, significant differences were seen in POUR (5% vs. 27%, p = 0.01) and α-blocker utilization (50% vs. 80%, p = 0.01). When age-matched, neither POUR (10% vs. 27%, p = 0.10) or α-blocker utilization (57% vs. 80%, p = 0.05) significantly differed between asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, respectively. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that only bilateral inguinal herniation (OR 6.55, p = 0.03) and symptoms (OR 6.78, p = 0.02) were associated with POUR. Asymptomatic patients with a unilateral hernia have a 4.3% risk of POUR, whereas symptomatic patients with a bilateral inguinal hernia have at 57.1% risk. We demonstrate that bilateral inguinal herniation and UGS independently increase the risk of POUR, whereas α-blockers do not. For the general surgical population, α-blockers should not be routinely prescribed to all patients and instead should be limited to high-risk patients.

Mesh versus non-mesh for inguinal and femoral hernia repair.

Mesh versus non-mesh for inguinal and femoral hernia repair.

Paravertebral blocks reduce the risk of postoperative urinary retention in inguinal hernia repair.

Inguinal hernia repair and general anesthesia (GA) are known risk factors for urinary retention. Paravertebral blocks (PVBs) have been utilized to facilitate enhanced recovery after surgery. We evaluate the benefit of incorporating PVBs into our anesthetic technique in a large cohort of ambulatory patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair. Records of 619 adults scheduled for ambulatory inguinal hernia repair between 2010 and 2015 were reviewed and categorized based on anesthetic and surgical approach [GA and open (GAO), GA and laparoscopic (GAL), PVB and open (PVBO), and GA/PVB and open (GA/PVBO)]. Patients were excluded for missing data, self-catheterization, chronic opioid tolerance, and additional surgical procedures coinciding with hernia repair. Risk factors associated with the primary outcome of urinary retention were examined using logistic regression. PVBO (n = 136) had significantly lower odds than GAO of experiencing urinary retention (odds ratio 0.16; 95% CI 0.05-0.51); overall (P < .01), with 4.4% (n = 6) of the patients in the PVBO group having urinary retention versus 22.6% (n = 7) with GAO. Expressed as intravenous morphine equivalences, the PVBO group had the lowest median opioid use (5mg), followed by GA, PVB, and open (7.5mg); GAO 25mg; and GAL 25mg. Also, 30% (n = 41) of the PVBO group required no opioid analgesia in the postanesthesia care unit. PVBs as the primary anesthetic or an adjunct to GA is the preferred anesthetic technique for open inguinal hernia repair as it facilitates enhanced recovery after surgery by decreasing risk of urinary retention, opioid requirements, and length of stay.

Predictors of Acute Postoperative Urinary Retention after Transvaginal Uterosacral Suspension Surgery.

ObjectivesTo investigate the rate of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) and identify the risk factors for this complication in women who underwent transvaginal uterosacral suspension surgery.MethodsA retrospective chart review was conducted for 75 women who underwent transvaginal uterosacral suspension surgery with vaginal hysterectomy, repair of cystocele, and levator myorrhaphy with/without transobturator anti-incontinence surgery. POUR was defined as a need for continuous intermittent catheterization on the third day subsequent to removal of the urethral indwelling catheter.ResultsAcute POUR was reported in 18 women (24.0%). Thirty-six of the 75 patients (48.0%) had undergone anti-incontinence surgery. Crude analysis revealed significant association between the following variables and the risk of POUR: hypertension, the lower average flow rate in the pressure-flow study (PFS), greater post-void residual (PVR) urine volume in PFS, and PVR >30% of the total bladder capacity (TBC) in PFS. In the logistic regression analysis, PVR >30% of the TBC in PFS was identified as the only significant predictor of POUR (odds ratio, 15.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.5–90.9; P = 0.003).ConclusionsThe PVR >30% of the TBC in PFS was identified as the only predictive factor of acute POUR in women who underwent transvaginal uterosacral suspension surgery.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Postoperative Urinary Retention in Total Hip Arthroplasty Performed Under Spinal Anesthesia

BackgroundThe objective of this study is to determine the risk factors for postoperative urinary retention (POUR) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) under spinal anesthesia. MethodsConsecutive patients who underwent a primary THA without preoperative catheterization under spinal anesthesia were identified in a prospectively collected institutional patient database. All patients were monitored postoperatively for urinary retention on the basis of symptoms and the use of bladder ultrasound scans performed by a hospital technician. If necessary, straight catheterization was performed up to 2 times prior to indwelling catheter insertion. ResultsOne hundred eighty patients were included in the study. Six patients who required indwelling catheterization for intraoperative monitoring were excluded. Seventy-six patients experienced POUR and required straight catheterization. Fourteen patients ultimately required indwelling catheterization. One patient who was not catheterized developed a urinary tract infection versus none of the patients who were catheterized. POUR was significantly associated with intraoperative fluid volume and a history of urinary retention (P = .018 and .023, respectively). Intraoperative fluid volumes of 2025, 2325, 2875, and 3800 mL were associated with a specificity for POUR of 60%, 82.7%, 94.9%, and 98%, respectively. No significant associations were found among catheterization and gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, history of polyuria, history of incontinence, postoperative oral narcotics use, or surgical duration. ConclusionPatients with a history of prior urinary retention and those who receive high volumes of intraoperative fluid volume are at higher risk for POUR following THA performed under spinal anesthesia.