Literature DB >> 36198809

Factors associated with postoperative urinary retention in patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation.

Johnathan A Drevik1,2, Zafardjan Dalimov3,4, Jacob Lucas3,4, Jay Simhan4, Joshua A Cohn4.   

Abstract

Placement of penile prosthesis had been well described in the outpatient setting, however, one barrier to same-day discharge is postoperative urinary retention (POUR). POUR remains a condition encountered during ambulatory surgical procedures and has yet to be characterized in patients undergoing penile prosthesis. We characterized POUR in a cohort of penile prosthesis recipients along with risk factors and management. Patients undergoing penile prosthesis implantation from 2014 through 2020 without pre-existing retention were included. All patients underwent a void trial immediately following penile prosthesis in the post-anesthesia care unit. POUR was strictly defined as (1) any patient requiring catheter replacement after prosthesis, (2) a rising post-void residual, or (3) inability to void after 6 h regardless of whether a catheter was placed. Independent procedures, demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative risk factors for POUR were assessed. 317 men were included of whom 27.1% experienced POUR. Men experiencing POUR and those not in retention were essentially indistinguishable with respect to previously described risk factors for POUR. Only use of both α-blockers and 5-α-reductase inhibitors was significantly associated with a greater risk of POUR, a finding maintained on adjusted analysis (adjusted odds ratio 10.1, 95% confidence interval 2.1 to 49.8). POUR resolved without intervention in 3.5%, a single episode of clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) in 7.0% of patients, and repeated CIC or indwelling catheter placement with a successful delayed void trial in 88.4% of patients. Rate of prosthesis infection in patients who experienced POUR did not significantly differ from those who did not experience POUR (4.7% vs. 2.2% p = 0.26). Our findings suggest that POUR is experienced in as many as 1 in 4 men undergoing penile prosthesis placement, most of whom must be managed with indwelling catheterization or repeated CIC. Those with indicators of symptomatic prostate enlargement are at significantly greater risk of urinary retention.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 36198809     DOI: 10.1038/s41443-022-00622-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Impot Res        ISSN: 0955-9930            Impact factor:   2.408


  22 in total

1.  Outpatient 3-piece inflatable penile prosthesis.

Authors:  J D Lubensky
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 2.  Postoperative urinary retention: anesthetic and perioperative considerations.

Authors:  Gabriele Baldini; Hema Bagry; Armen Aprikian; Franco Carli
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 7.892

3.  Comparison of in-patient and out-patient penile prosthesis surgery.

Authors:  J P Mulhall; K Bloom
Journal:  Int J Impot Res       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 2.896

4.  Outpatient inflatable penile prosthesis insertion.

Authors:  B B Garber
Journal:  Urology       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 5.  Erectile dysfunction.

Authors:  Rany Shamloul; Hussein Ghanem
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Incidence and risk factors for urinary retention after endoscopic hernia repair.

Authors:  Cody A Koch; Gary G Grinberg; David R Farley
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.565

7.  Novel Multi-Modal Analgesia Protocol Significantly Decreases Opioid Requirements in Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Patients.

Authors:  Ching Man Carmen Tong; Jacob Lucas; Ankur Shah; Christopher Foote; Jay Simhan
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2018-07-13       Impact factor: 3.802

8.  Prospective Risk Factor Analysis for the Development of Post-operative Urinary Retention Following Ambulatory General Surgery.

Authors:  A J Scott; S E Mason; A J Langdon; B Patel; E Mayer; K Moorthy; S Purkayastha
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 9.  The penoscrotal surgical approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement.

Authors:  Nikhil K Gupta; Josh Ring; Landon Trost; Steven K Wilson; Tobias S Köhler
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-08

Review 10.  The infrapubic surgical approach for inflatable penile prosthesis placement.

Authors:  Annah Vollstedt; Martin S Gross; Gabriele Antonini; Paul E Perito
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2017-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.