Comparing Postoperative Urinary Retention Rates Between Robotic Apical Prolapse Repairs

Kaythi Khin; Shaun T Adair; Laura Dhariwal; Erika Wasenda; Ellie Leong; Stephanie Chiu; Carolyn Botros

doi:10.1097/SPV.0000000000001529

Comparing Postoperative Urinary Retention Rates Between Robotic Apical Prolapse Repairs

Urogynecology (Phila). 2024 May 10. doi: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000001529. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Kaythi Khin¹, Shaun T Adair, Laura Dhariwal, Erika Wasenda, Ellie Leong, Stephanie Chiu, Carolyn Botros

Affiliation

¹ From the Division of Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Atlantic Health System, Morristown, NJ.

PMID: 38726985
DOI: 10.1097/SPV.0000000000001529

Abstract

Importance: Understanding the risk of urinary retention with different prolapse repair surgical procedures is important for perioperative counseling.

Objective: The study compared postoperative urinary retention rates between robotic sacrocolpopexy and robotic uterosacral ligament suspension.

Study design: This institutional review board-exempt retrospective cohort study compared patients who underwent pelvic organ prolapse repair with robotic sacrocolpopexy (RSCP) and robotic uterosacral ligament suspension (RUSLS) between June 2018 and March 2022. Our primary outcome was the rate of acute postoperative urinary retention (POUR) in these groups. Secondary outcomes were the number of days needed to resolve urinary retention and persistent voiding dysfunction.

Results: Out of 298 patients, 258 underwent RSCP and 40 underwent RUSLS. Acute POUR was found in 73 patients (24%): 46 patients (18%) in the RSCP group versus 26 patients (65%) in the RUSLS group (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated a significantly higher rate of acute POUR after RUSLS (odds ratio [OR] = 17.92, confidence interval [CI] = 3.06-104.86; P = 0.001). Patients with an elevated preoperative postvoid residual volume >100 mL or concomitant midurethral sling were more likely to develop POUR (OR = 2.93, CI = 1.43-5.98; P = 0.003 and OR = 2.19, CI = 1.16-4.14; P = 0.016, respectively). While patients with higher parity were less likely to have urinary retention (OR = 0.71, CI = 0.53-0.96; P = 0.024), age, body mass index, prolapse stage, and concurrent posterior repair did not affect the urinary retention rate significantly. The number of days needed to resolve POUR and persistent voiding dysfunction were similar.

Conclusions: Acute POUR appears more likely to develop after RUSLS compared to RSCP. Elevated preoperative postvoid residual volume and concomitant midurethral sling surgery independently increase the risk of POUR.