Reducing postoperative catheterisation after anterior colporrhaphy from 48 to 24 h: a randomised controlled trial
Abstract
Introduction and hypothesis There is a distinct lack of literature on postoperative management after anterior colporrhaphy (AC). Our traditional postoperative protocol consisted of 24 h of indwelling catheterisation followed by 24 h of self-intermittent catheterisation. We hypothesised that a new protocol consisting of only 24 h of indwelling catheterisation might produce better results without additional complications.Methods From April 2014 to July 2017, all candidates for AC were randomised to catheter removal 24 or 48 h 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 24 h.Results 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 48 h group (0.35 vs 0.13, p = 0.02).Conclusions According to our results, reducing the catheterisation from 48 to 24 h 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Two trials with a total of 277 women evaluated POP surgery with in-dwelling catheter removal at longer than 24 hours versus at 24 hours after surgery.
“POP surgery with in‐dwelling catheter removal at longer than 24 hours versus at 24 hours after surgery: two trials with a total of 277 women (Fernandez‐Gonzalez 2019; Kamilya 2010).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Fernandez‐Gonzalez 2019
Two trials reported on postoperative pain (Athanasiou 2019; Fernandez-Gonzalez 2019).
“Two trials reported on postoperative pain (Athanasiou 2019; Fernandez‐Gonzalez 2019).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Fernandez‐Gonzalez 2019
Seven trials reported on adverse events (bladder injury, bowel injury, readmission to hospital within 30 days) (Ballard 2014; Fernandez-Gonzalez 2019; McClurg 2014; Pauls 2013; Rahn 2023; Sassani 2020; Westermann 2016).
“Seven trials reported on adverse events (bladder injury, bowel injury, readmission to hospital within 30 days) (Ballard 2014; Fernandez‐Gonzalez 2019; McClurg 2014; Pauls 2013; Rahn 2023; Sassani 2020; Westermann 2016).”
From Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery (2025) · cites this paper as Fernandez‐Gonzalez 2019
Cites
Haylen, B. T., Ridder, D. J. M. K. D., Freeman, R. M., Swift, S., Berghmans, B. C. M., Lee, J., Monga, A. K., Petri, E., Rizk, D. E. E., Sand, P. K., et al. (2009) · Neurourology and Urodynamics · doi:10.1002/nau.20798 · Cited by 3,090 · see citing works
Haylen, B. T., Maher, C., Barber, M. D., Camargo, S., Dandolu, V., Digesu, G. A., Goldman, H. B., Hüser, M., Milani, A. L., Moran, P. A., et al. (2016) · Neurourology and Urodynamics · doi:10.1002/nau.22922 · Cited by 427 · see citing works
Haylen, B. T., Maher, C., Barber, M. D., Camargo, S., Dandolu, V., Digesu, G. A., Goldman, H. B., Hüser, M., Milani, A. L., Moran, P. A., et al. (2016) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-016-3003-y · Cited by 267 · see citing works
Surgery for women with anterior compartment prolapse
Maher, C., Feiner, B., Baessler, K., Christmann-Schmid, C., Haya, N., & Brown, J. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004014.pub6 · Cited by 266 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The repair of anterior vaginal wall prolapse with native tissue remains an established surgical procedure in comparison with other techniques using meshes or biological grafts [1].”
ResultPons, M. E., Álvarez, P. R., & Clota, M. P. (2004) · Medicina Clínica · doi:10.1016/s0025-7753(04)74212-8 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Predicting Short‐Term Urinary Retention After Vaginal Prolapse Surgery
Hakvoort, R. A., Dijkgraaf, M. G. W., Burger, M. P. M., Emanuel, M. H., & Roovers, J. (2009) · Neurourology and Urodynamics · doi:10.1002/nau.20636 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Short term urinary catheter policies following urogenital surgery in adults
Phipps, S., Yik Nyok, L. I. M., McClinton, S., Barry, C., Rane, A., & N'Dow, J. M. (2006) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004374.pub2 · Cited by 100 · see citing works
Sánchez-Sánchez, B., Torres-Lacomba, M., Yuste-Sánchez, M. J., Navarro-Brazález, B., Pacheco‐da‐Costa, S., Gutiérrez-Ortega, C., & Goñí, Á. Z. (2013) · European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.07.006 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
How long should urinary bladder catheterisation be continued after vaginal prolapse surgery?
Hakvoort, R. A., Elberink, R., Vollebregt, A., van der Ploeg, T., & Emanuel, M. H. (2004) · BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00181.x · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Dicuio, M., Pomara, G., Fabris, F. M., et al. (2005) · PubMed · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Haylen, B. T., Freeman, R. M., Lee, J. K., Swift, S., Cosson, M., Deprest, J. A., DWYER, P. L., Fatton, B., Kocjancic, E., Maher, C., et al. (2012) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-011-1659-x · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Glavind, K., Mørup, L., MADSEN, H., & Glavind, J. (2007) · Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1080/00016340701505317 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Haylen, B. T., Freeman, R. M., Lee, J., Swift, S., Cosson, M., Deprest, J. A., DWYER, P. L., Fatton, B., Kocjancic, E., Maher, C., et al. (2012) · Neurourology and Urodynamics · doi:10.1002/nau.22199 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Hakvoort, R. A., Burger, M. P. M., Emanuel, M. H., & Roovers, J. (2009) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-009-0847-4 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Weemhoff, M., Wassen, M. M. L. H., Korsten, L., Serroyen, J., Kampschöer, P. H. N. M., & Roumen, F. J. M. E. (2011) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-010-1304-0 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
The accuracy of post-void residual measurement in women
Haylen, B. T., & Lee, J. (2008) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-008-0568-0 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Kringel, U., Reimer, T., Tomczak, S., Green, S., Kundt, G., & Gerber, B. (2010) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-010-1221-2 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Voiding trial outcome following pelvic floor repair without incontinence procedures
Wang, R., Won, S., Haviland, M. J., et al. (2016) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-016-2975-y · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Alonzo-Sosa, J. E., Jt, F.-C., & Paredes-Canul, M. (1997) · PubMed · Cited by 24 · see citing works
Repeatability of post-void residual urine ≥ 100 ml in urogynaecologic patients
Saaby, M., & Lose, G. (2011) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-011-1614-x · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Costa, M. M., Lleberia, J., Pubill, J., et al. (2017) · International Urogynecology Journal · doi:10.1007/s00192-017-3312-9 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Bray, R., Cartwright, R., Digesu, A., Fernando, R., & Khullar, V. (2017) · European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.01.015 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Perioperative interventions in pelvic organ prolapse surgery
Shahid, U., Haya, N., Baessler, K., Christmann-Schmid, C., Yeung, E., Chen, Z., & Maher, C. (2025) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd013105.pub2 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Fernandez-Gonzalez, S., Martinez Franco, E., Martínez-Cumplido, R., Molinet Coll, C., Ojeda González, F., Gómez Roig, M. D., & Amat Tardiu, L.
- Venue
- International Urogynecology Journal
- Published
- 2018-11-27
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1897-1902
- ISSN
- 0937-3462 (ISSN-L)
- 1433-3023
- OpenAlex
- W2903022914
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 22
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 0.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- International Urogynecology Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Urology › Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Urinary Tract Infections Management
- Keywords
- anterior colporrhaphy, indwelling urinary catheter, catheter removal timing, postoperative urinary retention, asymptomatic bacteriuria, urinary tract infection, postoperative pain, pelvic floor surgery, length of hospital stay
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Catheters, Indwelling, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Postoperative Care, Postoperative Complications, Prospective Studies, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures, Time Factors, Urinary Catheterization, Uterine Prolapse, Vagina
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
