British Association of Urological Surgeons suprapubic catheter practice guidelines - revised.
bowel injury
catheter
cystotomy
guidelines
safety
suprapubic
Journal
BJU international
ISSN: 1464-410X
Titre abrégé: BJU Int
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100886721
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
accepted:
04
05
2020
pubmed:
29
5
2020
medline:
21
1
2021
entrez:
29
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To report the updated and revised British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) guideline on indications, safe insertion and subsequent care of suprapubic catheters (SPCs). The existing BAUS guideline on the insertion of SPCs was reviewed and has been updated in light of both activity and outcome data published since the original guideline was written. A systematic review of all new data from 2010 onwards was carried out. This updated guideline is largely evidence-based but, where evidence was lacking, is based on the consensus of expert opinion from members of the BAUS Section of Female, Neurological and Urodynamic Urology. Suprapubic catheterization is widely used and generally considered a safe procedure. There is, however, a small risk of serious complications including bowel injury. The BAUS has produced an updated consensus statement on SPC use with the aim of minimizing risks and establishing best practice. Areas for future research and development are also highlighted. This review has been commissioned and approved by the BAUS and the Section of Female, Neurological and Urodynamic Urology. While SPC insertion is generally regarded as a safe procedure, the risk of serious morbidity and death must always be considered and outlined to patients. These revised guidelines should assist in minimizing the morbidity associated with SPC usage.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
416-422Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors BJU International © 2020 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) [Internet]. NHS Digital. Available at: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/data-tools-and-services/data-services/hospital-episode-statistics. Accessed January 2019
Khan A, Abrams P. Suprapubic catheter insertion is an outpatient procedure: cost savings resultant on closing an audit loop. BJU Int 2009; 103: 640-4
Lamont T, Harrison S, Panesar S, Surkitt-Parr M. Safer insertion of suprapubic catheters: summary of a safety report from the National Patient Safety Agency. BMJ 2011; 342: d924
Ahluwalia RS, Johal N, Kouriefs C, Kooiman G, Montgomery BSI, Plail RO. The surgical risk of suprapubic catheter insertion and long-term sequelae. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2006; 88: 210-3
Sheriff MK, Foley S, McFarlane J, Nauth-Misir R, Craggs M, Shah PJ. Long-term suprapubic catheterisation: clinical outcome and satisfaction survey. Spinal Cord 1998; 36: 171-6
Harrison SCW, Lawrence WT, Morley R, Pearce I, Taylor J. British Association of Urological Surgeons’ suprapubic catheter practice guidelines. BJU Int 2011; 107: 77-85
Edokpolo LU, Foster HE. Suprapubic cystostomy for neurogenic bladder using Lowsley retractor method: a procedure revisited. Urology 2011; 78: 1196-8
Jacob P, Rai BP, Todd AW. Suprapubic catheter insertion using an ultrasound-guided technique and literature review. BJU Int 2012; 110: 779-84
Goyal NK, Goel A, Sankhwar SN. Safe percutaneous suprapubic catheterisation. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2012; 94: 597-600
Johnson S, Fiscus G, Sudakoff GS, O’Connor RC, Guralnick ML. The utility of abdominal ultrasound during percutaneous suprapubic catheter placement. Can J Urol 2013; 20: 6840-3
Zacharia SC, Sinha M, Matippa P, Krishnamoorthy V. An audit of suprapubic catheter insertion performed by a urological nurse specialist. Indian J Urol 2013; 29: 16-8
Cronin CG, Prakash P, Gervais DA et al. Imaging-guided suprapubic bladder tube insertion: experience in the care of 549 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196: 182-8
Horgan AF, Prasad B, Waldron DJ, O’Sullivan DC. Acute urinary retention. Comparison of suprapubic and urethral catheterisation. Br J Urol 1992; 70: 149-51
Kidd EA, Stewart F, Kassis NC, Hom E, Omar MI. Urethral (indwelling or intermittent) or suprapubic routes for short-term catheterisation in hospitalised adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (12): CD004203
Feifer A, Corcos J. Contemporary role of suprapubic cystostomy in treatment of neuropathic bladder dysfunction in spinal cord injured patients. Neurourol Urodyn 2008; 27: 475-
Fowler CJ, Panicker JN, Drake M et al. A UK consensus on the management of the bladder in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2009; 80: 470-7
Mitsui T, Minami K, Furuno T, Morita H, Koyanagi T. Is suprapubic cystostomy an optimal urinary management in high quadriplegics? A comparative study of suprapubic cystostomy and clean intermittent catheterization. Eur Urol 2000; 38: 434-8
Bouchet-Doumenq C, Lefevre JH, Bennis M, Chafai N, Tiret E, Parc Y. Management of postoperative bladder emptying after proctectomy in men for rectal cancer. A retrospective study of 190 consecutive patients. Int J Colorectal Dis 2016; 31: 511-8
Takase-Sanchez MM, Thompson JC, Hale DS, Heit MH. Suprapubic versus transurethral bladder drainage following reconstructive pelvic surgery: a comparison of patient satisfaction and quality of life. Int Urogynecol J 2017; 28: 721-8
Andersen JT, Heisterberg L, Hebjørn S et al. Suprapubic versus transurethral bladder drainage after colposuspension/vaginal repair. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1985; 64: 139-43
Branagan GW, Moran BJ. Published evidence favors the use of suprapubic catheters in pelvic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 2002; 45: 1104-8
Jalil R, Mukundan C, Bhatti TS. An adverse event of suprapubic catheter SPC insertion. A call for updating the existing guidelines. BMJ Case Rep 2012; 2012: bcr2012007424
Suprapubic.pdf [Internet]. Available at: https://www.baus.org.uk/_userfiles/pages/files/Patients/Leaflets/Suprapubic.pdf. Accessed January 2019
Okabayashi K, Ashrafian H, Zacharakis E et al. Adhesions after abdominal surgery: a systematic review of the incidence, distribution and severity. Surg Today 2014; 44: 405-20
Lee MJ, Papanicolaou N, Nocks BN, Valdez JA, Yoder IC. Fluoroscopically guided percutaneous suprapubic cystostomy for long-term bladder drainage: an alternative to surgical cystostomy. Radiology 1993; 188: 787
Albrecht K, Oelke M, Schultheiss D, Tröger HD. The relevance of urinary bladder filling in suprapubic bladder catheterization. Urol Ausg A 2004; 43: 178
Scath-system-for-suprapubic-catheterisation-pdf-63499293712069.pdf [Internet]. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/advice/mib68/resources/scath-system-for-suprapubic-catheterisation-pdf-63499293712069. Accessed August 2019
Hall S, Ahmed S, Reid S et al. A national UK audit of suprapubic catheter insertion practice and rate of bowel injury with comparison to a systematic review and meta-analysis of available research. Neurourol Urodyn 2019; 38: 2194
Rapid Response Report - Supporting Info.pdf [Internet]. Available at: https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/4148aa48/files/uploaded/Rapid%20Response%20Report%20-%20Supporting%20Info.pdf. Accessed March 2019
Stonier T, Simson N, Wilson E, Stergios KE. Bowel perforation presenting three months after suprapubic catheter insertion. BMJ Case Rep. 2017; 2017: bcr2017220791
Linsenmeyer MA, Linsenmeyer TA. Accuracy of bladder stone detection using abdominal X-ray after spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med 2004; 27: 438-42
Young MJ, Osman NI, Phillips L et al. Another therapeutic role for intravesical botulinum toxin: patients with long-stay catheters and refractory bladder pain and catheter bypass leakage. Eur Urol Focus 2020; 6: 339-43
draft-guideline.pdf [Internet]. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng113/documents/draft-guideline. Accessed August 2019