A comparative assessment of irrigation and drainage characteristics for commercially available urethral catheters

Introduction We aimed to investigate irrigation and drainage characteristics of commercially available urethral catheters and determined which catheter offers the best flow characteristics. Material and methods Twelve different commercially available urethral catheters from three compa-nies (Bard™, Rusch™ and Dover™) were investigated to compare their irrigation and drainage prop-erties. Irrigation port, drainage port and overall cross-sectional areas for a 24Fr 3-way catheter was measured and compared. The maximum (Qmax) and average (Qavg) irrigation and drainage flow rates for each catheter was measured for 20–40 seconds using uroflowmetry. The primary endpoint was to determine which catheter offers optimal irrigation and drainage parameters. Results Overall cross-sectional area, irrigation port cross-sectional area, and drainage port cross-sectional area differed significantly for each 24Fr 3-way catheter assessed (p <0.001). The 24Fr 3-way Rusch Simplas-tic™ catheter consistently demonstrated the greatest maximal flow rate (Qmax: 5 ±0.3 ml/s) and average flow rate (Qavg: 4.6 ±0.2 ml/s) for irrigation. The 24Fr 3-way Dover™ catheter provided the greatest drainage properties (Qmax: 19.7 ±2 ml/s; Q avg: 15.9 ±5 ml/s). In the setting of continuous bladder irrigation, the 24Fr 3-way Rusch Simplastic™ catheter provided the highest irrigation rates (Qmax: 6.6 ±1.8 ml/s; Q avg: 4.6 ±0.9 ml/s). Conclusions Three-way catheters demonstrate significant differences in their irrigation and drainage characteristics. The type of catheter selected should be based on the appropriate prioritization of efficient bladder irrigation versus efficient bladder drainage.