Trial reportInvestigative and clinical urology2022
Clinical benefits of retrograde bladder filling method prior to catheter removal after TURP for BPH: A prospective randomized trial.
Trial report in Investigative and clinical urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04309032 (A Randomized Controlled Trial on the Effect of Retrograde Partial Bladder Fill on Time to Discharge and Overall Medical Staff Satisfaction), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
A Randomized Controlled Trial on the Effect of Retrograde Partial Bladder Fill on Time to Discharge and Overall Medical Staff Satisfaction
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate possible benefits and clinical feasibility of retrograde bladder filling method prior to intra-vesical catheter removal after transurethral prostatectomy (TURP) for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIALS AND
methodsMale patients undergoing TURP for BPH from January 2019 to October 2019 were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into either retrograde filling (RF) or spontaneous voiding (SV) methods at a single institution to determine safety and efficacy of RF (NCT04309032), with surgeons blinded to allocation. Perioperative outcomes including postoperative complications were compared between two groups. Clinician/patients' satisfaction level which was evaluated with postoperative questionnaires were also compared.
resultsA total of 56 patients were randomized into two groups and 56 were included in final analysis (28 men in RF group, 26 in SV group). No significant differences in baseline characteristics including age, prostate volume, or perioperative uroflowmetry were observed. However, RF significantly facilitated time to void (67.0±63.2 vs. 144.0±78.7 min; p<0.001) and time to discharge (168.4±57.2 vs. 218.9±106.9 min; p=0.046). Immediate postoperative complications were comparable in both methods with no significant difference. Overall patient and medical staff satisfaction showed tolerable and similar response by either procedure.
conclusionsRF method for intra-vesical catheter removal is a safe and satisfactory method that can facilitate early voiding detection and shorten the time to discharge. Further trials are required to further validate our results.
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.