ArticleUrogynecology (Philadelphia, Pa.)2025
Effect of Older Age on Postoperative Urinary Retention After Prolapse Surgery.
Article in Urogynecology (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incidence and Risk Factors of Postoperative Urinary Retention After Thyroidectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.World journal of surgery · 2026Article
- Incidence and Risk Factors of Postoperative Urinary Retention in Gynecologic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical epidemiology · 2026Review
- Risk of postoperative urinary retention after sugammadex use in laparoscopic hernia repair: A matched cohort study of 23,444 cases.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
importancePostoperative urinary retention (POUR) is common after reconstructive pelvic surgery. Little is known about the relationship between older age (≥70 years) and POUR after pelvic organ prolapse surgery.
objectivesWe aimed to investigate the relationship between age ≥70 years and POUR. Secondarily, we aimed to determine if duration of urinary catheterization differed by age in women with POUR. STUDY
designThis was a secondary analysis of a dual-center retrospective study on perioperative adverse events in biologic females aged ≥61 years undergoing prolapse surgery. The primary outcome was POUR, defined as a failed retrograde voiding trial requiring bladder catheterization. The secondary outcome was duration of temporary bladder catheterization. We developed a stepwise multivariable logistic regression model, which included relevant variables with P < 0.10 on univariate analyses and a forced age variable.
resultsIn this cohort of 2,665 women, mean ± standard deviation age was 71.2 ± 6.7 years, and 54.6% were ≥70 years, POUR occurred in 830 (31.1%) patients. Women with POUR had a lower body mass index and were more likely to have undergone a vaginal prolapse surgery and concomitant hysterectomy/incontinence procedure ( P < 0.05). They had higher estimated blood loss (75 vs 50 mL, P < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, age ≥70 years was not associated with POUR (adjusted odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI [0.83-1.26]). Age ≥70 years was associated with longer duration of catheterization (5 vs 4 days, P < 0.01).
conclusionAge was not associated with POUR when controlling for other clinical factors (body mass index, surgical approach, concomitant hysterectomy/incontinence surgery, and estimated blood loss). These factors may affect POUR in older women and should be considered in perioperative management.
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.