Urologia internationalis · 2026
Transurethral versus Suprapubic Catheterization in Acute Bacterial Prostatitis: Clinical Predictors and Outcomes.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Handke Analena, Gassen Charlotte, Rausch Patricia, Orf Christopher, Bahlburg Henning, Bach Peter, Roghmann Florian, Tully Karl
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Acute bacterial prostatitis (ABP) is a common complication in men with lower urinary tract symptoms. While antibiotics are the mainstay of treatment, the choice between transurethral catheterization (TC) and suprapubic catheterization (SC) remains debated. This study aimed to identify factors influencing catheterization choice and its impact on clinical outcomes.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 255 patients presenting with ABP between January 2015 and December 2024. Clinical- and infection-related parameters, including prostate volume, post-void residual urine (PVR), C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, and the presence of prostatic abscess, were assessed for associations with catheter type. We further evaluated these factors and catheterization approach regarding hospital stay, need for subsequent subvesical de-obstruction, and 30-day readmission rates.
RESULTS: The median age of the patients in this study was 64 years and median prostate volume 52 cc. Most patients received SC (64.3%). PVR was less frequent in the TC group (21.8% vs. 34.6%, p = 0.042), while high CRP was more common (68.1% vs. 54.9%, p = 0.039). Prostatic abscesses occurred more often in SC patients (8.6% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.119). Median hospital stay was comparable (5 days, respectively, p = 0.676). TC patients had lower 30-day readmission rates (1.1% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.045), whereas SC patients more frequently required subvesical de-obstruction during follow-up through 12/2,024 (21.3% vs. 11.0%, p = 0.038).
CONCLUSION: SC was preferred in patients with high PVR and abscesses. TC was associated with fewer readmissions, whereas SC patients more often required subsequent subvesical de-obstruction. These findings highlight the need for prospective studies to optimize catheterization strategies in ABP.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 255 patients presenting with ABP between January 2015 and December 2024. Clinical- and infection-related parameters, including prostate volume, post-void residual urine (PVR), C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, and the presence of prostatic abscess, were assessed for associations with catheter type. We further evaluated these factors and catheterization approach regarding hospital stay, need for subsequent subvesical de-obstruction, and 30-day readmission rates.
RESULTS: The median age of the patients in this study was 64 years and median prostate volume 52 cc. Most patients received SC (64.3%). PVR was less frequent in the TC group (21.8% vs. 34.6%, p = 0.042), while high CRP was more common (68.1% vs. 54.9%, p = 0.039). Prostatic abscesses occurred more often in SC patients (8.6% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.119). Median hospital stay was comparable (5 days, respectively, p = 0.676). TC patients had lower 30-day readmission rates (1.1% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.045), whereas SC patients more frequently required subvesical de-obstruction during follow-up through 12/2,024 (21.3% vs. 11.0%, p = 0.038).
CONCLUSION: SC was preferred in patients with high PVR and abscesses. TC was associated with fewer readmissions, whereas SC patients more often required subsequent subvesical de-obstruction. These findings highlight the need for prospective studies to optimize catheterization strategies in ABP.