Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1996;7(2):98-101.
doi: 10.1007/BF01902381.

Comparison of 1 and 3 days' transurethral Foley catheterization after retropubic incontinence surgery

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Comparison of 1 and 3 days' transurethral Foley catheterization after retropubic incontinence surgery

H A Schiøtz. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 1996.

Abstract

This prospective study was done to see if reducing transurethral Foley catheterization from 3 days to 1 would lead to fewer urinary tract infections without an increase in voiding problems. Ninety-one women undergoing retropubic surgery for stress urinary incontinence (Burch or Marshall-Marchetti-Krantz) were randomized to either 1 or 3 days' catheterization. Antibiotics were not used. Infection was diagnosed in 9 (20.0%) patients in the 1-day group and in 16 (34.8%) in the 3-day group. Delayed voiding occurred in 13 (28.9%) and 10 (21.7%) patients, respectively, and 5 (11.1%) and 3 (6.5%), respectively, received a new catheter. The differences do not reach statistical significance. Therefore, catheter time may safely be reduced to 1 day. This may lead to fewer infections but also somewhat more voiding problems. If a transurethral catheter is to be used, on balance the two regimens are equivalent.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. J Urol. 1976 Dec;116(6):751-3 - PubMed
    1. Obstet Gynecol. 1987 Apr;69(4):546-9 - PubMed
    1. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1991 Mar 10;111(7):841-3 - PubMed
    1. J Urol. 1986 Dec;136(6):1205-7 - PubMed
    1. Obstet Gynecol. 1984 Jan;63(1):85-91 - PubMed

Publication types