Management strategy for urologic morbidity in surgery of placenta accreta spectrum: stents or catheters?

Objective: Surgery for placenta accreta spectrum disorders is known to be associated with urologic morbidity. Although previous studies have shown preoperative ureteral stent placement might be useful for preventing the urologic morbidity, the patient's discomfort caused by it should not be ignored. Whether there is an alternative management strategy remains unknown. This study was to evaluate the effectiveness of ureteral stents and catheters in preventing urologic injury in patients with placenta accreta spectrum undergoing surgery.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study. All cases with diagnosed placenta accreta spectrum who underwent surgery at Peking University Third Hospital between January 2018 and December 2020 were collected and reviewed. They were divided into two groups according to the different management strategies for preoperative placement of ureteral catheters or stents. The primary outcome was urologic injury, which was defined as the presence of ureteral or bladder injury during and after surgery. Secondary outcomes included urologic complications within the first three months after surgery. The median (interquartile range) or proportions were reported for variables. The Man Whitney U test, chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression were used for analysis.

Results: Ultimately, 99 patients were included in this study. Ureteral catheters were placed in 52 patients and ureteral stents were placed in 47 patients. Placenta accreta, placenta increta, and placenta percreta were diagnosed in three, 19, and 77 women, respectively. The hysterectomy rate was 52.53%. Overall, urologic injuries occurred in three patients (3.03%), including one case of combined bladder and ureteral injury (1.01%) and two cases of bladder injuries (2.02%). Only one ureteral injury occurred in a patient with a ureteral stent, which was recognized postoperatively ( = .475). All bladder injuries were vesical rupture which were recognized and repaired intraoperatively; one patient in the catheter group and two patients in the stent group ( = .929). After adjusting for confounding variables, multinomial regression analysis revealed no significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of bladder injuries(aOR: 0.695, 95% CI: 0.035-13.794,  = .811). A lower risk of urinary irritation (aOR: 0.186, 95% CI: 0.057-0.605,  = .005), hematuria (aOR: 0.011, 95% CI: 0.001-0.136,  < .001), and lower back pain (aOR: 0.075, 95% CI: 0.022-0.261,  < .001) was found in patients with ureteral catheters than in those with ureteral stents.

Conclusion: The ureteral stents didn't confer a protective benefit in the surgical management for placenta accreta spectrum compare with catheters; however, they did result in a higher incidence of postoperative urologic complications. Ureteral temporal catheters may be an alternative strategy for placenta accreta spectrum cases suspected with urinary tract involved prenatally. Moreover, clearly and explicitly reporting "double J stent" or "temporal catheter" is necessary for future researches.