Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Urinary Catheterization: a Paradigm Shift in Difficult Urinary Catheterization

  • Men’s Health (A Dabaja, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The urinary catheter is an ancient device for urinary drainage in patients. Placement of a urethral catheter is a common medical procedure that may have led to morbidity and mortality. Urethral catheterization is commonly performed by a nurse. Difficult catheter placement generates urology consultation. Difficult catheterization with a vision-guided urinary catheter may provide expedited and successful catheter placement by nursing personnel.

Methods

A PubMed.gov and Ovid Medline search for articles on history of urinary catheter, difficult urinary catheterization, iatrogenic urethral injury, iatrogenic urethral injury and CAUTI, management of iatrogenic urethral injury, and techniques for urinary catheter placement was performed.

Results

The history of urinary catheters is reviewed. Technical advances in the last century are discussed. Indications for catheter placement are included. Outcomes and cost of complications of urinary catheters are discussed relative to present practice quality standards. Review of difficult urinary catheterization management algorithms developed with urological catheter improvements during the last decade is analyzed. Educational and technological advances to improve outcomes of urinary catheter use are addressed.

Conclusions

Provider attention to issues of urinary catheterization is enhanced by education and additional skills for catheterization. Physician and nurse providers can use current technology with preparation to improve the catheterization care of patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Saint S, Chenoweth CE. Biofilms and catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Infect Dis Clin N Am. 2003;17:411–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chavez AH, Rajab MH, Kuykendall JS, Bird ET, Wagner KR, Jenkins ER, et al. Incidence of Foley catheter related urethral injury in a tertiary referral center. Scottsdale: AUA-South Central Abstracts; 2009. p. 14–7.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kashefi C, Messer K, Barden R, Sexton C, Parsons JK. Incidence and prevention of iatrogenic urethral injuries. J Urol. 2008;179:2254–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Moog FP, Karenberg A, Moll F. The catheter and its use from Hippocrates to Galen. J Urol. 2005;174:1196–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zorgniotti AW. Frederic E, B. Foley. Early development of balloon catheter. Urology. 1973;1:75–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Carr HA. A short history of the Foley catheter: from handmade instrument to infection-prevention device. J Endourol. 2000;14:5–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Carter HB, Chan DY. Basic instrumentation and cystoscopy. In: Wein AJ, Kavoussi LR, Novick AR, Partin AW, Peters CA, editors. Campbell-Walsh urology. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2007. p. 161–5.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Klevens RM, Edward JR, Richards Jr CL, Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Pollock DA, et al. Estimating health care-associated infections and deaths in US hospitals, 2002. Public Health Rep. 2007;122:160–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. National Quality Forum (NQF). Safe practice 25: catheter-associated urinary tract infection prevention. Safe practices for better healthcare-2010 update: a consensus report. Washington, DC: NQF; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Rothfeld AF, Stickley A. A program to limit urinary catheter use at an acute care hospital. Am J Infect Control. 2010;38:568–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Singer AJ, Richman PB, Kowalska A, Thode Jr HC. Comparison of patient and practitioner assessment of pain from commonly performed emergency department procedures. Ann Emerg Med. 1999;33(6):652–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Leuck AM, Wright D, Ellingson L, Kraemer L, Kuskowski MA, Johnson JR. Complications of Foley catheters—is infection the greatest risk? J Urol. 2012;187:1662–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Aaronson DS, Wu AK, Blaschko SD, McAninch JW, Garcia M. National incidence and impact of noninfectious urethral catheter related complications on the surgical care improvement project. J Urol. 2011;185:1756–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Villanueva C, Hemstreet GP. Difficult catheterization: tricks of the trade. AUA Updates. 2011; 30:5.

  15. Fenton AS, Morey AF, Aviles R, Garcia CR. Anterior urethral strictures: etiology and characteristics. Urology. 2005;65:1055–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lachat ML, Moehrlen U, Bruetsch HP, Vogt PR. The Seldinger technique for difficult transurethral catheterization: a gentle alternative to suprapubic puncture. Br J Surg. 2000;87:1729–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Beaghler M, Grasso 3rd M, Loisides P. Inability to pass a urethral catheter: bedside role of the flexible cystoscope. Urology. 1994;44:268–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bacsu C, Van Zyl S, Rourke KF. A prospective analysis of consultation for difficult urinary catheter insertion at tertiary care centres in Northern Alberta. Can Urol Assoc J. 2013;7:343–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Freid RM, Smith AD. The Glidewire technique for overcoming urethral obstruction. J Urol. 1996;156:164–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zammit PA, German K. The difficult urethral catheterization: use of hydrophilic guidewire. BJU Int. 2004;93:883–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Athanassopoulos A, Liatsikos EN, Barbalias GA. The difficult urethral catheterization: use of hydrophilic guidewire. BJU Int. 2005;95:192.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chiou RK, Aggarwal H, Chen W. Glide-wire assisted Foley catheter placement: a safe and simple technique for difficult male catheterization. Can Urol Assoc J. 2009;3:189–92.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Mistry S, Goldfarb D, Roth DR. Use of hydrophilic-coated catheters in management of acute urinary retention. Urology. 2007;70:25–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Banks KL, Willette PA, Boyers PJ, Shaffer LET, Edwards CP. Feasibility of a visually guided male urinary catheterization device. Abstract: American Urological Association. AUA Annual Meeting. 2009.

  25. Thomas AZ, Giri SK, Meagher D, Creagh T. Avoidable iatrogenic complications of urethral catheterization and inadequate intern training in a tertiary-care teaching hospital. BJU Int. 2009;104:1109–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bødker B, Lose G. Postoperative urinary retention in gynecologic patients. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003;14:94–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the collaboration of Dr. George P. Hemstreet of Creighton University Medical Center/Nebraska Western Iowa VA Healthcare and Dr. Sean P. Elliott of the University of Minnesota Medical Center and are grateful for their review and participation in the production of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Texas A&M University Health Science Center College of Medicine/Baylor Scott & White Health, 2401 South 31st Street, Temple, TX, 76508, USA

    Kristofer R. Wagner, Erin T. Bird & K. Scott Coffield

Authors
  1. Kristofer R. Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Erin T. Bird
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Scott Coffield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Scott Coffield.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Kristofer R. Wagner and Erin T. Bird each declare no potential conflicts of interest.

K. Scott Coffield serves as noncompensated medical advisor to Percuvision, Inc.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Men’s Health

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wagner, K.R., Bird, E.T. & Coffield, K.S. Urinary Catheterization: a Paradigm Shift in Difficult Urinary Catheterization. Curr Urol Rep 17, 82 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-016-0641-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-016-0641-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation