Incidence of and risk factors for postoperative urinary retention in men after carotid endarterectomy.
Age Factors
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Databases, Factual
Diabetes Mellitus
/ epidemiology
Endarterectomy, Carotid
/ adverse effects
Humans
Incidence
Length of Stay
Male
Middle Aged
Peripheral Arterial Disease
/ epidemiology
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Sex Factors
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Urinary Catheterization
Urinary Retention
/ diagnosis
Urodynamics
Carotid
Endarterectomy
Urinary retention
Urinary tract infection
Journal
Journal of vascular surgery
ISSN: 1097-6809
Titre abrégé: J Vasc Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8407742
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2020
09 2020
Historique:
received:
20
06
2019
accepted:
26
10
2019
pubmed:
23
1
2020
medline:
20
1
2021
entrez:
23
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The goal of this study was to determine the incidence of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) in men after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and to identify preventable risk factors for the development of this complication. All male patients who underwent CEA from 2014 to June 2018 were identified. Exclusions included CEA with concomitant cardiac surgery, baseline dialysis, and indwelling or straight catheterization. POUR was the primary end point, defined as inability to void requiring catheterization within 24 hours postoperatively or after removal of a preoperatively placed Foley catheter. POUR was further classified as mild (single catheterization), moderate (multiple catheterizations), or severe (catheterization prolonging discharge or discharge with catheter). Logistic regression assessed for POUR risk factors. There were 294 male patients who underwent CEA during the study period; 82 (28.2%) developed POUR. Of these, 48 (57.8%) were mild, 15 (18.1%) were moderate, and 20 (24.1%) were severe. At baseline, POUR was associated with older age, peripheral artery disease (PAD), chronic kidney disease, diabetes, ambulation deficit, prior urinary retention, and statin and chronic tamsulosin use. Overall, 31.6% (93) of the cohort had a Foley catheter placed before the procedure, and this was protective against POUR (no Foley vs Foley, 31.8% vs 20.4%; P = .043). Independent risk factors for POUR included prior urinary retention (odds ratio [OR], 3.4 [1.6-7.3]; P = .002), diabetes (OR, 2.1 [1.1-3.7]; P = .016), PAD (OR, 2.3 [1.1-5.2]; P = .036), and age (per year: OR, 1.1 [1.02-1.10]; P < .001). Preoperative Foley catheter placement remained protective (OR, 0.4 [0.2-0.7]; P = .003). Preoperative Foley catheter placement was not associated with urinary tract infection (preoperative Foley catheter: 0% vs 1%; P = .54). However, POUR was associated with an increased risk for urinary tract infections (10% vs 1%; P = .001), which was highest in severe POUR (20% vs 1%; P = .001). POUR was also associated with a discharge to rehabilitation (16% vs 4%; P = .002), with highest rates in the moderate and severe POUR cohorts (20% each). POUR is common in men undergoing CEA, and almost a quarter of those with POUR have a discharge delay or are discharged with a Foley catheter. Preoperative Foley catheterization is protective against POUR and should be considered in older patients, diabetics, patients with PAD, and those with a history of urinary retention.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31964571
pii: S0741-5214(19)32647-3
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.10.093
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
943-950Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.