ArticleInternational neurourology journal2017
Risk and Management of Postoperative Urinary Retention Following Spinal Surgery.
Article in International neurourology journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urinary dysfunction following single-level lumbar fusion in men: A propensity-matched analysis of surgical approach.Surgical neurology international · 2026Article
- Association between spinopelvic parameters and postoperative urinary retention in thoracolumbar spine surgery: a propensity-matched analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Postoperative urinary retention after oblique lumbar interbody fusion under the systematic management protocol.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Delayed Ejaculation After Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Claims Database Analysis.Global spine journal · 2022Article
- Effects of Acupuncture on Hospitalized Patients with Urinary Retention.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePostoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a common complication after spinal surgery. However, no clear definition of POUR currently exists, and no studies have evaluated the management of POUR. We aimed to investigate the prognostic factors for eventual POUR-free status in spinal surgery patients.
methodsThe records of patients who received a urologic consultation for POUR from January 2015 to December 2016 were reviewed. POUR-free status was defined as a voiding volume (VV) >100 mL and a VV ratio >50%. Patients with an indwelling Foley catheter and those with any postoperative complications were excluded. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the primary management method (Foley catheterization [FC] or intermittent catheterization [IC]).
resultsIn total, 205 patients (median age, 70.6 years) were evaluated. Significant prognostic factors for eventual POUR-free status were intraoperative FC, previous spinal surgery, operative level (L3-5), lumbar fusion, and total volume (TV) at the time of POUR. Bladder training and medication did not reduce the time to POUR-free status. In patients who underwent FC, the duration of indwelling FC was a significant prognostic factor for POUR-free status. In a subanalysis, the TV (≥500 mL) and VV ratio at the time of POUR were significant prognostic factors for POUR-free status after primary management. Among the patients who achieved a POUR-free status, 8 (6.4%) experienced recurrent POUR. The VV ratio (<62.0%) was the only predictor of recurrent POUR.
conclusionsThe criterion of POUR-free status is useful after spinal surgery. IC and FC were similar in their efficacy for the management of these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.