Journals / Eastern Journal of Medicine / 2020 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 2

Spinal Anesthesia Is Associated With Postoperative Urinary Retention In Women Undergoing Urogynecologic Surgery

Pages
293–298
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The overall rate of the POUR was %22.8.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:We hypothesized that spinal anesthesia could lead to impairment in bladder function and consequently, to postoperative urinary retention (POUR), particularly in patients undergoing urogynecologic surgery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study was aimed to compare the rate of the POUR between the subjects receiving spinal and general anesthesia who underwent urogynecologic surgery.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The overall rate of the POUR was %22.8.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

We hypothesized that spinal anesthesia could lead to impairment in bladder function and consequently, to postoperative urinary retention (POUR), particularly in patients undergoing urogynecologic surgery. This study was aimed to compare the rate of the POUR between the subjects receiving spinal and general anesthesia who underwent urogynecologic surgery. One hundred and eighty subjects who underwent urogynecologic surgery between June 2016 and May 2019 were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate the risk of POUR after general versus spinal anesthesia. All subjects underwent a standardized voiding trial subsequent to surgery, which was performed by backfilling the bladder with 300 ml of saline. The presence of > 100 ml volume in the post-void bladder scan was defined as POUR. The primary outcome was to compare rates of POUR between spinal and general anesthesia. Identifying the risk factors for POUR was the secondary outcome of this study. Spinal anesthesia group included 80, and the general anesthesia group consisted of 100 patients. The overall rate of the POUR was %22.8. The proportion of the patients with POUR was significantly higher in the spinal anesthesia group compared to that of the subjects in the general anesthesia group (%33.8vs%14, P=0.002). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the adoption of spinal anesthesia (Odds ratio: 3.172, 95%CI: 1.383-7.275, P=0.006) and presence of diabetes (Odds ratio: 5.840, 95% CI:2.325-14.666, P< 0.001) were independent predictors for the development of POUR. The rate of the POUR is significantly higher in patients receiving spinal anesthesia than those receiving general anesthesia among women undergoing urogynecologic surgery.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILMAZ, G., AKÇA, A., KIYAK, H., KARAASLAN, O., SALİHOĞLU, Z. (2020). Spinal Anesthesia Is Associated With Postoperative Urinary Retention In Women Undergoing Urogynecologic Surgery. Eastern Journal of Medicine, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 2, 293–298. https://ajindex.com/articles/152075

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Berman L, Berman J, Felder S, et al. Seeking help for sexual function complaints: what gynecologists need to know about the female patient's experience. FertilSteril 2003; 79: 572-576.
  2. Buckley BS, Lapitan MC. Prevalence of urinary incontinence in men, women, and children--current evidence: findings of the Fourth International Consultation on Incontinence. Urology 2010; 76: 265-270. Geller EJ. Prevention and management of postoperative urinary retention after urogynecologic surgery. International journal of women's health 2014; 6: 829-838.
  3. Dorflinger A, Monga A. Voiding dysfunction. Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology. 2001; 13: 507-512. Partoll LM. Efficacy of tension-free vaginal tape with other pelvic reconstructive surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 1292-1295; discussion 1295-1298.
  4. MacLean AB, Cardozo L, MacLean AB. Incontinence in women. RCOG Press; 2002.
  5. Dietz H, Haylen B, Vancaillie T. Female pelvic organ prolapse and voiding function. International Urogynecology Journal 2002; 13: 284-288.
  6. Hong B, Park S, Kim HS, et al. Factors predictive of urinary retention after a tension-free vaginal tape procedure for female stress urinary incontinence. The Journal of urology 2003; 170: 852-856.
  7. Sokol AI, Jelovsek JE, Walters MD, et al. Incidence and predictors of prolonged urinary retention after TVT with and without concurrent prolapse surgery. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2005; 192: 1537-1543.
  8. Teo R, Punter J, Abrams K, et al. Clinically overt postpartum urinary retention after vaginal delivery: a retrospective case-control study. International Urogynecology Journal 2007; 18: 521-524.
  9. Ben-David B, Levin H, Solomon E, et al. Spinal bupivacaine in ambulatory surgery: the effect of saline dilution. Anesthesia & Analgesia 1996; 83: 716-720.
  10. Kleeman S, Goldwasser S, Vassallo B, et al. Predicting postoperative voiding efficiency after operation for incontinence and prolapse. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2002; 187: 49-52.
  11. Buchko BL, Robinson LE, Bell TD. Translating an evidence-based algorithm to decrease early post-operative urinary retention after urogynecologic surgery. Urologic nursing 2013; 33: 24-28, 32. Baldini G, Bagry H, Aprikian A, et al. Postoperative urinary retention: anesthetic and perioperative considerations. Anesthesiology. 2009; 110: 1139-1157.
  12. Kowalik U, Plante MK. Urinary Retention in Surgical Patients. The Surgical clinics of North America 2016; 96: 453-467.
  13. Hoppe EJ, Main WP, Kelley SR, et al. Urina