Outcomes and Safety of Suprapubic vs Urethral Catheterization Following Pelvic Fascia‒Sparing Robotic Prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION

Urethral catheter (UC) discomfort remains a burden following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Suprapubic catheters (SPCs) may reduce patient discomfort and increase satisfaction. Pelvic fascia‒sparing (PFS) RARP reduces the technical challenges of intraoperative SPC placement. We examined postoperative outcomes of SPC vs UC placement following PFS-RARP.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of a prospective institutional review board‒approved database of PFS-RARP patients from June 2020 to December 2022 receiving SPC (n = 108) or UC (n = 104) postoperatively. Demographics and clinical and perioperative outcomes were captured. Postoperative patient-reported quality of life was measured using EPIC-CP (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice). Patients with intraoperative complications or intraoperative leaks or undergoing salvage prostatectomy were excluded. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to compare outcomes.

RESULTS

No significant differences in demographics or oncologic outcomes existed. There were no differences in complications, including urethral stricture or anastomotic leak. Men receiving SPC vs UC had earlier return to continence (7 vs 16 days, P < .001) and higher continence rates at catheter removal (67.6% vs 43.3%, P = .0003). On adjusted analyses, SPC was an independent predictor of continence at catheter removal (OR 2.21, P = .023). There were no differences between groups in preoperative or postoperative EPIC-CP scores, including no differences in postoperative quality of life (P = .46).

CONCLUSIONS

SPC after PFS-RARP is a safe and feasible alternative to UC. SPC is associated with an earlier return to continence and higher continence rates at catheter removal. Use of SPC may increase overall patient satisfaction following PFS-RARP.