Suprapubic tube compared with urethral catheter drainage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness of the suprapubic drainage and urethral catheterization after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and China Biology Medicine disc were systematically researched from their inception to December 2017. We selected randomized controlled trials, cohort studies comparing suprapubic tube with urethral catheter drainage in RARP patients. A meta-analysis was performed using R software, and a random-effects model was used to pool the effect size. Ten studies met eligibility criteria (N = 1248), including 3 RCTs, 3 prospective studies and 4 retrospective studies. Suprapubic drainage was associated with a reduction in the penile pain (39.64% [44 of 111]) compared with the UC group (62% [106 of 171]) (pooled RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.02, P = 0.05). However, two groups showed similarity in the overall pain (Postoperative days 1-3: pooled MD -0.26, 95% CI 1.34 to 0.83, P = 0.64; Postoperative days 6-7: pooled MD -0.50, 95% CI -1.54 to 0.54, P = 0.34), urinary incontinence (pooled RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.15, P = 0.23), bladder neck contracture (pooled RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.53, P = 0.45), urinary retention (pooled RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.29 to 2.70, P = 0.82), anastomotic stricture (P = 0.15), urethral stricture (P = 0.84) and bacteriuria (P = 0.40). The present meta-analysis showed that suprapubic drainage may be associated with less penile pain, but there was no conclusive evidence that suprapubic drainage was advantaged in other outcomes. Due to the low quality and small quantity of the available comparative studies, more high-quality randomized trials are needed to provide stronger evidence of the benefits of the two routes.

Asian journal of surgery. 2018 Sep 26 [Epub ahead of print]

Mei-Xuan Li, Peng Cheng, Liang Yao, Hui-Juan Li, Yang-Qin Xun, Pei-Jing Yan, Cai-Wen Han, Cun-Cun Lu, Wen-Bo He, Meng Wang, Rong Liu, Tian-Kang Guo, Ke-Hu Yang

School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China., Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China., Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China; Gansu Province People's Hospital, Lanzhou, China., Gansu Province People's Hospital, Lanzhou, China; School of Clinical Medical Sciences, Gansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China., Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China., School of Public Health, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China., The Second Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China., Gansu Province People's Hospital, Lanzhou, China. Electronic address: ., Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China; Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Knowledge Translation of Gansu Province, Lanzhou, China. Electronic address: .

E-Newsletters

Newsletter subscription

Free Daily and Weekly newsletters offered by content of interest

The fields of GU Oncology and Urology are rapidly advancing. Sign up today for articles, videos, conference highlights and abstracts from peer-review publications by disease and condition delivered to your inbox and read on the go.

Subscribe