Role of pelvic drain and timing of urethral catheter removal following RARP: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract

ObjectivesTo assess the clinical value of routine pelvic drain (PD) placement and early removal of urethral catheter (UC) in patients undergoing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), as perioperative management such as the necessity of PD or optimal timing for UC removal remains highly variable.MethodsMultiple databases were searched for articles published before March 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies were deemed eligible if they investigated the differential rate of postoperative complications between patients with/without routine PD placement and with/without early UC removal, defined as UC removal at 2–4 days after RARP.ResultsOverall, eight studies comprising 5112 patients were eligible for the analysis of PD placement, and six studies comprising 2598 patients were eligible for the analysis of UC removal. There were no differences in the rate of any complications (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78–1.00), severe complications (Clavien–Dindo Grade ≥III; pooled OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.54–1.69), all and/or symptomatic lymphocele (pooled OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.50–1.33; and pooled OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.26–1.29, respectively) between patients with or without routine PD placement. Furthermore, avoiding PD placement decreased the rate of postoperative ileus (pooled OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51–0.91). Early removal of UC resulted in an increased likelihood of urinary retention (OR 6.21, 95% CI 3.54–10.9) in retrospective, but not in prospective studies. There were no differences in anastomosis leakage and early continence rates between patients with or those without early removal of UC.ConclusionsThere is no benefit for routine PD placement after standard RARP in the published articles. Early removal of UC seems possible with the caveat of the increased risk of urinary retention, while the effect on medium‐term continence is still unclear. These data may help guide the standardisation of postoperative procedures by avoiding unnecessary interventions, thereby reducing potential complications and associated costs.