OBJECTIVE: To analyse current practice in the management of acute urinary retention (AUR) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in the UK, and to assess how much of this is evidence-based. METHODS: In all, 410 consultant urologists practising in UK hospitals were sent a questionnaire about the management of AUR secondary to BPH. Data were collected on practice relating to initial management, trial without catheter (TWOC), the use of alpha-blockers and the follow-up. The need for a uniform guideline in the management of AUR secondary to BPH was also assessed. RESULTS: We received 270 (66%) replies, of which six were excluded because they were from subspeciality interests (e.g. paediatric urology) or had ambiguous answers; 264 (64%) were therefore available for analysis. Urethral catheterization was the initial management of choice (98%), failing which a suprapubic catheter was inserted. Two-thirds (65.5%) admitted the patient after catheterization. Most consultants initiated alpha-blockers (70.5%), with 64% (118) of these using a TWOC 2 days after starting them. One failed TWOC was an indication for transurethral resection of the prostate for 192 (72.8%), with 136 (49.8%) re-admitting the patient for surgery later. Routine follow-up after a successful TWOC was advocated by 77.3%. Just over half the respondents (52.6%) felt that there was no need for uniform guidelines in the management of AUR secondary to BPH. CONCLUSION: This survey identified a reasonable national uniformity in managing AUR secondary to BPH in the UK, but significant aspects of current practice are not evidence-based.
OBJECTIVE: To analyse current practice in the management of acute urinary retention (AUR) secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in the UK, and to assess how much of this is evidence-based. METHODS: In all, 410 consultant urologists practising in UK hospitals were sent a questionnaire about the management of AUR secondary to BPH. Data were collected on practice relating to initial management, trial without catheter (TWOC), the use of alpha-blockers and the follow-up. The need for a uniform guideline in the management of AUR secondary to BPH was also assessed. RESULTS: We received 270 (66%) replies, of which six were excluded because they were from subspeciality interests (e.g. paediatric urology) or had ambiguous answers; 264 (64%) were therefore available for analysis. Urethral catheterization was the initial management of choice (98%), failing which a suprapubic catheter was inserted. Two-thirds (65.5%) admitted the patient after catheterization. Most consultants initiated alpha-blockers (70.5%), with 64% (118) of these using a TWOC 2 days after starting them. One failed TWOC was an indication for transurethral resection of the prostate for 192 (72.8%), with 136 (49.8%) re-admitting the patient for surgery later. Routine follow-up after a successful TWOC was advocated by 77.3%. Just over half the respondents (52.6%) felt that there was no need for uniform guidelines in the management of AUR secondary to BPH. CONCLUSION: This survey identified a reasonable national uniformity in managing AUR secondary to BPH in the UK, but significant aspects of current practice are not evidence-based.
Authors: Jeremy Yuen Chun Teoh; Chi Fai Kan; Bess Tsui; Peter K F Chiu; Chi Yin Man; Simon See Ming Hou; Chi Fai Ng Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2012-08-23 Impact factor: 2.370