Literature DB >> 29572921

Postoperative urinary retention after pelvic organ prolapse repair: Vaginal versus robotic transabdominal approach.

Junchan J Yune1, Julie W Cheng1, Hillary Wagner1, Joo Kim1, Jeffrey S Hardesty2, Sam Siddighi2.   

Abstract

AIMS: Postoperative urinary retention has been reported in 13-32% of patients that undergo pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair. The purpose of our study was to compare rates of urinary retention between transvaginal and robotic transabdominal approaches and identify risk factors for postoperative urinary retention following POP repair.
METHODS: Medical records of patients that underwent POP repair were reviewed. Surgeries included transvaginal high uterosacral ligament suspension (HUSLS) and robotic-assisted sacral colpopexy (RASCP). All patients underwent a retrograde fill voiding trial (RGVT) postoperatively. Demographics, comorbidities, preoperative urodynamic findings, and surgical procedures were compared between women that passed their RGVT and those that did not.
RESULTS: Out of 484 patients reviewed, 333 underwent POP repair with a transvaginal HUSLS and 151 underwent RASCP. Postoperative urinary retention was identified in 128 (26.4%) patients where 113 underwent transvaginal HUSLS and 15 underwent RASCP. The odds ratio (OR) of postoperative urinary retention following transvaginal HUSLS was 3.26 (CI 1.72-6.18; P < 0.001) compared to RASCP. Older age was also a risk factor for postoperative urinary retention (OR 1.03, CI 1.01-1.05; P = 0.012). While parity, preoperative post-void residual (PVR), and rates of concomitant transvaginal anterior/posterior repair were significantly higher in patients that developed postoperative urinary retention on univariate analysis, these factors did not demonstrate significance on multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Transvaginal HUSLS demonstrates a 3.26 OR for postoperative urinary retention compared to the robotic transabdominal approach. Older age is also a significant risk factor whereas parity, preoperative PVR, and rates of concomitant transvaginal anterior/posterior repair were not significant risk factors on multivariate analysis.
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  pelvic floor disorders; sacral colpopexy; stress urinary incontinence; urinary retention

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29572921     DOI: 10.1002/nau.23526

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurourol Urodyn        ISSN: 0733-2467            Impact factor:   2.696


  3 in total

1.  Voiding function after sacrocolpopexy versus native tissue transvaginal repair for apical pelvic organ prolapse in an ERAS era: A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Amr Sherif El Haraki; Jersey Burns; Christopher L Crafton; Candace Parker-Autry; Catherine Ann Matthews
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 1.932

2.  Timing and Success of Postoperative Voiding Trial After Colpocleisis With and Without Concomitant Midurethral Sling.

Authors:  T Clark Powell; Isuzu Meyer; Chee Paul Lin; Kelsey Lipking; Holly E Richter
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 2.091

3.  Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for uterosacral ligament suspension: pilot study of 35 cases of severe pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Zhiying Lu; Yisong Chen; Xiaojuan Wang; Junwei Li; Keqin Hua; Changdong Hu
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.