20: A randomized trial comparing conventional and “fast track” indwelling urinary catheter management among women undergoing benign gynecologic surgery

Strategies for the removal of short-term indwelling urethral catheters in adults

BACKGROUND

Urinary catheterisation is a common procedure, with approximately 15% to 25% of all people admitted to hospital receiving short-term (14 days or less) indwelling urethral catheterisation at some point during their care. However, the use of urinary catheters is associated with an increased risk of developing urinary tract infection. Catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI) is one of the most common hospital-acquired infections. It is estimated that around 20% of hospital-acquired bacteraemias arise from the urinary tract and are associated with mortality of around 10%. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005 and last published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of strategies for removing short-term (14 days or less) indwelling catheters in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 17 March 2020), and reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that evaluated the effectiveness of practices undertaken for the removal of short-term indwelling urethral catheters in adults for any reason in any setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors performed abstract and full-text screening of all relevant articles. At least two review authors independently performed risk of bias assessment, data abstraction and GRADE assessment.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 trials involving 12,241 participants. We judged the majority of trials to be at low or unclear risk of selection and detection bias, with a high risk of performance bias. We also deemed most trials to be at low risk of attrition and reporting bias. None of the trials reported on quality of life. The majority of participants across the trials had undergone some form of surgical procedure. Thirteen trials involving 1506 participants compared the removal of short-term indwelling urethral catheters at one time of day (early morning removal group between 6 am to 7 am) versus another (late night removal group between 10 pm to midnight). Catheter removal late at night may slightly reduce the risk of requiring recatheterisation compared with early morning (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.96; 10 RCTs, 1920 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if there is any difference between early morning and late night removal in the risk of developing symptomatic CAUTI (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.63; 1 RCT, 41 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether the time of day makes a difference to the risk of dysuria (RR 2.20; 95% CI 0.70 to 6.86; 1 RCT, 170 participants; low-certainty evidence). Sixty-eight trials involving 9247 participants compared shorter versus longer durations of catheterisation. Shorter durations may increase the risk of requiring recatheterisation compared with longer durations (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.35 to 2.41; 44 trials, 5870 participants; low-certainty evidence), but probably reduce the risk of symptomatic CAUTI (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.61; 41 RCTs, 5759 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may reduce the risk of dysuria (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.88; 7 RCTs; 1398 participants; low-certainty evidence). Seven trials involving 714 participants compared policies of clamping catheters versus free drainage. There may be little to no difference between clamping and free drainage in terms of the risk of requiring recatheterisation (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.21; 5 RCTs; 569 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if there is any difference in the risk of symptomatic CAUTI (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.63; 2 RCTs, 267 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or dysuria (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.54; 1 trial, 79 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Three trials involving 402 participants compared the use of prophylactic alpha blockers versus no intervention or placebo. We are uncertain if prophylactic alpha blockers before catheter removal has any effect on the risk of requiring recatheterisation (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.42; 2 RCTs, 184 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or risk of symptomatic CAUTI (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.06; 1 trial, 94 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials investigating prophylactic alpha blockers reported the number of participants with dysuria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence to suggest the removal of indwelling urethral catheters late at night rather than early in the morning may reduce the number of people who require recatheterisation. It appears that catheter removal after shorter compared to longer durations probably reduces the risk of symptomatic CAUTI and may reduce the risk of dysuria. However, it may lead to more people requiring recatheterisation. The other evidence relating to the risk of symptomatic CAUTI and dysuria is too uncertain to allow us to draw any conclusions. Due to the low certainty of the majority of the evidence presented here, the results of further research are likely to change our findings and to have a further impact on clinical practice. This systematic review has highlighted the need for a standardised set of core outcomes, which should be measured and reported by all future trials comparing strategies for the removal of short-term urinary catheters. Future trials should also study the effects of short-term indwelling urethral catheter removal on non-surgical patients.

A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials Investigating Methods of Postoperative Void Trials Following Benign Gynecologic and Urogynecologic Surgeries

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying postoperative void trials (VTs) following gynecologic and urogynecologic surgery to investigate (1) the optimal postoperative VT methodology and (2) the optimal time after surgery to perform a VT.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

METHOD OF STUDY SELECTION

We systematically searched the aforementioned data sources from inception to November 22, 2019, using a combination of subject headings and keywords for the following 3 concepts: gynecologic surgery (prolapse, benign gynecologic, and incontinence surgery), postoperative period, and voiding. We identified any RCT in English that studied VT methodology or timing in patients undergoing benign gynecologic or urogynecologic surgery. Discrepancies were adjudicated by a third reviewer. We followed the standard systematic review methodology and used the Jadad scoring system to assess bias. Extracted study outcomes included the following: proportion of patients discharged home with catheter, proportion of VT failure, surgery for retention, retention after initial VT, postoperative calls and visits, time in postanesthesia care unit (PACU), time to discharge, time to spontaneous void, duration of catheterization, patient and provider burden, and urinary tract infection (UTI).

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

We double screened 618 abstracts and clinical trial descriptions, assessed 56 full-text articles, and ultimately included 21 RCTs. The evidence was of low to moderate quality overall. The studies were divided into the following 2 categories: VT methodology (10 studies) and VT timing (11 studies). VT methodology included backfill-assisted (in operating room vs PACU), autofill, and force of stream studies. One RCT compared backfill-assisted with and without postvoid residual volume check. Outcomes were similar for all VT methods, except backfill-assisted decreased time to spontaneous void compared with autofill. In the VT timing category, earlier VT performance correlated with a shorter time to discharge, time to spontaneous void, duration of catheterization, and lower patient burden and UTI rate but had a higher rate of retention after initial VT. There was no difference between earlier vs later VT timing for proportion of discharged home with catheter or rate of VT failure. No studies reported outcomes of provider burden or postoperative calls.

CONCLUSION

In comparing VT methodologies, VT by backfill-assisted (in operating room vs PACU, ± postvoid residual volume), autofill, and force of stream resulted in similar outcomes with no one method being superior. Performing VT at an earlier postoperative time point results in shorter time to discharge and spontaneous void, shorter duration of catheterization, lower patient burden, and lower UTI risk, but it may increase the risk of retention after initial VT.

Early versus delayed urinary catheter removal after hysterectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

In bladder drainage, an essential part of post-hysterectomy care, the optimal timing for removing the urinary catheter is unclear. Our objective was to evaluate the risks and benefits of early (<6 h) vs delayed (>6 h) catheter removal post-hysterectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review searching MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception till May 2019 for randomised trials of women undergoing hysterectomy. We reported on urinary retention, positive urine culture, urinary tract infection (UTI) (defined by symptoms and/or antibiotic use), post-operative pyrexia, time to ambulation, and length of hospital stay. We assessed risk of bias in included trials and used a random-effect model to generate risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes, with 95 % confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Of 1020 potentially relevant citations, we included 10 randomised trials (1120 women). Four trials had low risk of bias for randomisation and allocation concealment while five had low risk for outcome assessment and selective reporting. Compared to delayed removal, women in the early catheter removal group had a higher risk of urinary retention and needing re-catheterisation (10 RCTs, RR 3.61, 95 %CI 1.21-9.21, I² = 56 %). There was some reduction in the risk of post-operative UTI (6 RCTs, RR 0.42, 95 %CI 0.18 to 0.96, I² = 0 %), but we did not find a significant difference in post-operative pyrexia (6 RCTs, RR 0.73, 95 %CI 0.43-1.24, I² = 18 %) or positive urine cultures (6 RCTs, RR of 0.56, 95 %CI 0.27-1.12, I² = 55 %). There was no significant difference in the average time to ambulation (3RCTs, WMD -4.6, 95 %CI -9.16 to -0.18, I² = 98 %) and length of hospital stay (3RCTs, WMD -1.05, 95 %CI -2.42 to 0.31, I² = 98 %). Our meta-regression on the provision of prophylactic antibiotics did not show a significant effect on the reported outcomes. Our analysis was limited by our inability to adjust for potential effect modifiers such as the surgical route.

CONCLUSIONS

Early removal of the urinary catheter <6 h post-hysterectomy seems to increase the risk of urinary retention and needing re-catheterisation, but may reduce post-operative UTI.