Small bowel injury after suprapubic catheter insertion presenting 3 years after initial insertion

Good, Daniel W.; Brush, J; Alhasso, Ammar; Stewart, Grant D.

doi:10.1136/bcr-2013-201436

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there have been several reports of delayed presentation of bowel perforations. Some of these have occurred following the first change of the catheter,1 4 5 others have presented up to 3 years later 6. It may be that the perforation is sealed by the catheter itself and the ensuing inflammatory fibrosis that occurs following insertion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bowel perforation presenting three months after suprapubic catheter insertion

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An 82-year-old male with multiple comorbidities, including previous laparotomies, had a suprapubic catheter (SPC) inserted under guidance with ultrasound and a flexible cystoscope. Three months following the procedure, having returned for a flexible cystoscopy for ongoing bladder pain syndrome, he became peritonitic postoperatively.A CT scan and subsequent laparotomy confirmed the SPC to be passing through a section of terminal ileum. The bowel was resected and he recovered well after a long hospital admission. A literature search found this delayed presentation of bowel perforation following SPC insertion to be rare, with only a few other cases reported. In particular, previous abdominal surgery increases the risk of this complication. This case serves as a reminder of the rare but potentially significant risk of SPC insertion and unusually highlights that this may not present immediately.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bowel perforation presenting three months after suprapubic catheter insertion

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although suprapubic catheters have many advantages, there are also several important risks and limitations to note. The most common are risk of visceral injury (bowel perforation),6,15 bleeding, hematuria, and UTI 12,16. Sheriff et al reviewed 185 cases and identified 2.7% incidence of bowel perforation, with one fatal outcome,17 but the National Patient Safety Agency placed the figure at 0.15% 18.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using central venous catheter for suprapubic catheterization in cardiac surgery

Bilehjani

Fakhari

2017

RRU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Suprapubic catheterization is an alternative method for urinary drainage that is used when transurethral catheterization fails. Traditionally, inserted large-bore suprapubic catheters may cause fatal complications. During the past decade, we used a small central venous catheter (CVC) suprapubicly in 16 male patients for the purpose of urinary drainage, when transurethral catheterization failed. The procedure is performed in no more than 10 minutes. Success rate was 100% and this approach did not lead to any complications. In conclusion, placing a CVC for suprapubic drainage is a safe method with a high success rate and we recommend it in patients with failed transurethral catheterization after a few attempts (2–3 attempts).

show abstract

“… 1 In a related case of obstruction, a suprapubic catheter was noted to transfix a loop of pelvic small bowel before entering the bladder. 2 Other more common complications of suprapubic catheter placement are hematuria and urinary tract infections. 3 Bowel perforation is an infrequent occurrence and is more likely to happen during routine changes of suprapubic catheters.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%