SynthesisIrish journal of medical science2025
The effect of the timing of catheter removal on postoperative urinary continence after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Irish journal of medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal length of postoperative catheterisation time after radical prostatectomy remains to be controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to explore the impact of catheter removal time on urinary continence after radical prostatectomy (RP).
methodsThe MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify eligible studies published before June 2025. The inverse variance method with random-effects modeling was used to calculate summary odds ratios (ORs) and their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
resultsFifteen studies comprising 4,159 patients who underwent RP matched our eligibility criteria. Early catheter removal was associated with an increased likelihood of urinary retention (OR = 2.20, 95% CI: 1.22-3.95) in the postoperative day (POD) 2 group compared to more than POD 2 days group. However, this significant difference was not observed in patients with POD 3 (vs POD > 3, OR = 1.37, 95% CI: 0.37-5.09), patients with POD 4 (vs POD > 4, OR = 4.41, 95% CI: 0.88-22.18), and patients with POD 7 (vs POD > 7, OR = 6.49, 95% CI: 0.80-52.83). Moreover, early removal of the catheter was not associated with an increased risk of urinary incontinence (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.58-2.68), anastomotic leakage (OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.76-1.96), vesical neck stenosis (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.09-5.83) compared to the regular group. The findings are robust, as indicated by sensitivity and meta-regression analyses.
conclusionsEarly catheter removal seems feasible, but one should be aware of the increased risk of urinary retention, especially in patients of POD 2. Moreover, it seems to be safe in terms of urinary incontinence, anastomotic leakage, and vesical neck stenosis. We hope that our findings will help to guide the standardised management of catheter removal after RP, and early catheter-free discharge after RP may provide relevant clinical benefits for these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40848088What 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.