International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 60–62 | Cite as

A comparison of outcomes of transurethral versus suprapubic catheterization after Burch cystourethropexy

  • Terry S. DunnEmail author
  • Johanna Figge
  • Doug Wolf
Original Article


The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients with transurethral vs suprapubic catheterization after Burch cystourethropexy. This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who had an anti-incontinence procedure primarily including Burch cystourethropexy with hysterectomy or Burch alone between July 1997 and June 2002 and comparing the outcomes of transurethral vs suprapubic catheters. The suprapubic and transurethral catheter placed were both 16-Fr Foley catheters. The variables analyzed were length of hospital stay, length of catheterization, postoperative fever, and urinary tract infection. The number of postoperative visits and complications within each group were also compared. Analysis was done utilizing Fisher’s exact test and Wilcoxon’s rank-sum analysis when indicated. We analyzed the charts of 217 patients. The outcomes of surgery (i.e., blood loss, postoperative morbidity, incidence of urinary tract infection, length of hospital stay) in each group did not statistically differ. There was a significant difference in length of cauterization: 7.1 days for the transurethral group and 9.61 days for the suprapubic group, a 1.79 day difference (p=0.001) and a difference in the number of visits for complaints of pain, 2.5 visits for the suprapubic group, 3.5 visits for the transurethral group (p=0.01). There were no differences in outcomes whether a transurethral or suprapubic catheter was used. There was a significant difference in duration of catheterization and extra visits to the clinic or hospital with a practitioner for the complaint of pain. Patients with a transurethral catheter had on the average one more visit than those with the suprapubic catheter.


Transurethral catheterization Suprapubic catheterization Burch cystourethropexy 


  1. 1.
    Theofrastous JPM, Cobb DL, Van Dyke AH, Shelley L (2002) A randomized trial of suprapubic versus transurethral bladder drainage after open Burch urethropexy. J Pelvic Surg 8:72–77Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burch J (1961) Urethrovaginal fixation to Cooper’s ligament for correction of stress incontinence, cystocele, and prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 81:281–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heit M, Vogt V, Brubaker L (1997) An alternative statistical approach for predicting prolonged catheterization after Burch colposuspension during reconstructive pelvic surgery. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 8:203–208PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stanton S, Cardozo L, Chaudhury N (1978) Spontaneous voiding after surgery for urinary incontinence. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 85:149–152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    FitzGerald M, Brubaker L (2001) The etiology of urinary retention after surgery for genuine stress incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 20:13–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Turck M, Goffe B, Petersdorf R (1962) The urethral catheter and urinary tract infection. J Urol 88:834–837PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hodgkinson C, Hodari A (1966) Trocar suprapubic cystotomy for postoperative bladder drainage in the female. J Obstet Gynecol 96:773–783Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kunin C, McCormack R (1966) Prevention of catheter-induced urinary tract infections by sterile closed drainage. N Engl J Med 274:1155–1162PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tambyah P, Halvarson K, Maki D (1999) A prospective study of the pathogenesis of catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Mayo Clin Proc 74:131–136PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schiotz H, Malme P, Tanbo T (1989) Urinary tract infections and asymptomatic bacteriuria after vaginal plastic surgery. A comparison of suprapubic and transurethral catheters. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 68:453–455PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mountokalakis T, Skounakis M, Tselentis J (1985) Short-term versus prolonged systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in patients treated with indwelling catheters. J Urol 134:506–508PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nyren P, Runeberg L, Kostiala A (1981) Prophylactic methenamine hippurate or nitrofurantoin in patients with an indwelling urinary catheter. Ann Clin Res 13:16–21Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Urogynecological Association 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Denver Health Medical CenterDenverUSA
  2. 2.University of Colorado Health Science CenterDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations