Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36198809›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of impotence research2024

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

Johnathan A Drevik, Zafardjan Dalimov, Jacob Lucas, Jay Simhan, Joshua A Cohn

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of impotence research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Johnathan A DrevikEinstein Healthcare Network, Department of Urology, Philadelphia, PA, USA. johnathan.drevik@fccc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1172-6037
Zafardjan DalimovEinstein Healthcare Network, Department of Urology, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jacob LucasEinstein Healthcare Network, Department of Urology, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jay SimhanFox Chase Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Joshua A CohnFox Chase Cancer Center, Department of Surgery, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Fox Chase Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

Penile ImplantationPostoperative ComplicationsUrinary RetentionAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedPenile ProsthesisRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsUrinary Catheterization

Identifiers

PMID36198809
OpenAlexW4302007864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.