ClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT03479931Updated Nov 4, 2021

Caesarean Delivery With or Without an Indwelling Bladder Catheter. A Randomised Trial.

An interventional study of Without placement of a catheter and With placement of a catheter in Cesarean Section; Infection and Catheter-Related Infections, sponsored by University of Aarhus. Terminated at 1 site in Denmark. Open to female participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-11-04.

Primary conditionCatheter-Related InfectionsRegistry: InfectionsReclassifiedWhy we changed it
Registry
Infections — the first condition term the registry derived for this study.
ClinicalTrials.gg
Catheter-Related Infections
Why
  1. The study's listed conditions name Catheter-Related Infections, a narrower term within Infections.
Confidence
High: the new condition is named in the study's own listed conditions. Of 351 hand-checked studies reclassified this way, 68% were exactly right and 84% in the right disease family; the registry's first term was right for 5% (measured 2026-10-21). How we classify →
Wrong?
Tell us the study's main condition →

Sponsored by University of Aarhus · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention

Why this study was terminated
Due to required changes in methods.

Help build ClinicalTrials.gg — short surveys, remote interviews or testing, in your language. Take part →

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
44
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

The aim of this study is to compare the incidence of catheter associated culture-based urinary tract infection (UTI) after elective CD with or without preoperative placement of a urinary catheter.

Read the detailed description

Protokol version 1_01062017 Scientific protocol Caesarean delivery with or without an indwelling bladder catheter. A randomised trial.

Background In 2015, approximately 20% of all pregnant women gave birth by caesarean delivery (CD) in Denmark.

Preoperative preparations for CD include the placement of an indwelling urinary catheter. The rationale behind the procedure is to decrease the risk of surgical injury to a distended bladder and to avoid postoperative urinary retention, but the scientific evidence of the benefit to these matters is not compelling(1). On the other hand, the placement of an indwelling urinary catheter poses a considerable risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) (2), besides the costs associated with delayed ambulation, prolonged hospital stay and catheter associated discomfort to the woman (3, 4) A Cochrane review (1) on indwelling bladder catheter versus no catheter inserted at CD, found that indwelling bladder catheterization was associated with longer time to first spontaneous voiding and more pain/discomfort due to catheterization and/or with first voiding. Furthermore, the women with an indwelling catheter had longer time to ambulation and longer hospital stay. None of the included studies (n=3) in the review reported on bladder injury nor the prespecified criteria for diagnosing UTI and thus no result on UTI as a primary outcome could be obtained. In addition, none of the randomized trials on CD with or without an indwelling bladder catheter were carried out in countries with peri-operative procedures and handling of patients similar to those in Europe.

In a prospective clinical study (5), there were no bladder injuries in 344 women undergoing elective CD without a catheter. UTI was significantly more prevalent in the catheterized group (6%) than in the non-catheterized group (0.58%), P\<0.05). In retrospective studies on women undergoing CD with an indwelling catheter, the overall prevalence of bladder injuries is found to be around 0.3%(6, 7).

The aim of this study is to compare the incidence of catheter associated culture- based urinary tract infection (UTI) after elective CD with or without preoperative placement of a urinary catheter.

Statistics Sample size: A power calculation was performed based on a 5.7% incidence of UTI in the catheter group and 0.5% in the non-catheter group(4). With an alpha of 0.05 and a power of 80%, a total of 400 women would have to be included to detect a significant difference in the primary outcome.

The association between the placement of an indwelling urinary catheter during caesarean delivery and the outcomes of interest will be explored using an Intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The investigators will perform comparative analyses using multivariate logistic regression with calculation of Odds Ratios with 95% confidence intervals with adjustments for significant differences in baseline characteristics. Subgroup analyses will be performed according to the number of previous CDs No interim analysis will be performed. A local trial steering committee will be appointed.

Side effects, risks, and inconveniences for the project participants

Any inconveniences for the women in the study with providing an extra urinary sample for bacterial culture are very small. Women in the indwelling catheter group receive current standard treatment. Women without a catheter may have an increased risk of:

  1. Urinary retention; a known side effect to surgical procedures and regional anaesthesia (9, 10). The women without an indwelling catheter might have a slightly increased risk of urinary retention, but with our postoperative surveillance all cases will be detected and treated in both groups of women.
  2. Intraoperative bladder injury; the overall risk is very low (0.3%). In women suspected of peri-operative bladder injury, both with or without an indwelling catheter, methylene blue will be installed into the bladder through an indwelling catheter, which will serve to identify the leak. In case of accidental bladder puncture, surgical repair will be performed immediately.

On the other hand, women without a catheter may have a decreased risk of

  1. Urinary tract infection
  2. Delayed ambulation
  3. Prolonged hospitalization
  1. Biological material Urinary samples are collected from the study participants, for both urine dipstick analysis and for urine culture. After obtaining results from the urine culture, it will be destroyed. This is standard procedure at the Department of Microbiology.

Information from patient records The participants' medical records are accessed for information on the predefined outcomes; urine test results, any voiding difficulties after CD and catheter removal, information on the surgery, time to ambulation, length of hospital stay, any sign or symptoms of an infection or fever during hospital stay and if there has been any contact to our department after discharge.

Legal considerations The project will be reported to the Danish Data Protection Agency through the joint notifications, Region Midtjylland. The information collected from the project participants will be protected according to Danish law (Lov om behandling af personoplysninger and Sundhedsloven).

Basic information (name, contact information, social security number, previous medical and pregnancy history) is provided by the participants upon inclusion.

Financial compensation The project participants will not receive financial compensation for their participation.

Participant information and inclusion Contact to potential participants is established at a joint information meeting for women booked for planned CD, where verbal and written information about the project will be provided, by a project assistant or a midwife from the delivery ward. Both the assistant and midwife are informed and taught personally by the trial doctor. Thus, women will have the opportunity for reflection at least 4 days before making any decision. Furthermore, the women are offered extended verbal information at the delivery ward, where they are welcome to bring an assessor.

In any need of further information, the women will be given contact information on key persons responsible for the project.

All study participants give oral and written consent at the day of the CD, after at least 4 days of consideration in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Central Denmark Research Ethics Committee.

The women are informed that their consent can be withdrawn at any time.

Publication of project results Both positive, negative, and inconclusive results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals and at the website of the Regional Hospital of Randers.

Ethical considerations With this study the investigators hope to evaluate the possible benefits of caesarean delivery without routine placement of an indwelling catheter in order to improve the course for women with a future CD.

The investigators do think that the possible knowledge gained from the project will exceed any possible disadvantages experienced by the individual study participants.

Information on patient compensation The Patient Compensation Association covers the trial.

02

Conditions studied

  • Cesarean Section; Infection
  • Catheter-Related Infections

Browse trials for

03

In context

Catheter-Related Infections Reclassified

112 studies on the registry are indexed under Catheter-Related Infections; 18 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 44 is below the median of 149 across 84 interventional studies indexed under Catheter-Related Infections.

Browse Catheter-Related Infections studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Aarhus is the lead sponsor of 1,300 studies on the registry; 189 are open to participants now.

Compared within Catheter-Related Infections, this study's primary condition as ClinicalTrials.gg classifies it; the registry's first condition term is Infections. The counts are of registry records indexed under each term, refreshed daily. How we classify →

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Elective caesarean section (CD). At least 18 years of age.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Antibiotic therapy less than one week before caesarean and ≥ 3 prior CDs.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
44 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Without placement of a catheter

    Without preoperatively placement of an indwelling catheter during Caesarean section

    Procedure: Without placement of a catheter

  • Active comparator
    With placement of a catheter

    Normal pre-operative routines with placement of an indwelling catheter during Caesarean section

    Procedure: With placement of a catheter

Interventions

  • ProcedureWithout placement of a catheter

    Elective cesarean section without preoperative placement of a urinary catheter.

  • ProcedureWith placement of a catheter

    Elective cesarean section with preoperative placement of a urinary catheter.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI).

    Urine culture (second day post partum) yielding greater than 105 CFU/ml (of one type of bacteria). Symptoms of UTI include dysuria, urgency and frequency.

    Time frame: 3 days

Secondary outcomes

  1. The incidence of UTI later than second day postpartum

    UTI verified by a positive culture and/or treatment for UTI initiated by a general practitioner

    Time frame: 30 days

  2. Any need for catheterization due to postoperative urinary retention

    Any need for catheterization due to postoperative urinary retention

    Time frame: 24 hours

  3. Postpartum blood loss >1000 mL.

    Postpartum blood loss \>1000 mL.

    Time frame: 4 hours

  4. Time to ambulation

    From time of birth and until standing or walking

    Time frame: Up until 48 hours

  5. Length of hospital stay

    From time of birth and until discharge.

    Time frame: Up until 7 days

  6. Intraoperative laceration of the bladder

    Laceration of bladder during surgery

    Time frame: 7 days

  7. The incidence of preoperative bacteria in urineculture

    Positive urine culture preoperatively

    Time frame: 1 day

07

Study locations

1 site
  • The Region Hospital of Randers
    Randers, 8930, Denmark
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Abdel-Aleem H, Aboelnasr MF, Jayousi TM, Habib FA. Indwelling bladder catheterisation as part of intraoperative and postoperative care for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Apr 11;2014(4):CD010322. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010322.pub2. PubMed 24729285 ↗
  • Weber DJ, Sickbert-Bennett EE, Gould CV, Brown VM, Huslage K, Rutala WA. Incidence of catheter-associated and non-catheter-associated urinary tract infections in a healthcare system. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011 Aug;32(8):822-3. doi: 10.1086/661107. No abstract available. PubMed 21768769 ↗
  • Ghoreishi J. Indwelling urinary catheters in cesarean delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2003 Dec;83(3):267-70. doi: 10.1016/s0020-7292(03)00144-9. PubMed 14643036 ↗
  • Nasr AM, ElBigawy AF, Abdelamid AE, Al-Khulaidi S, Al-Inany HG, Sayed EH. Evaluation of the use vs nonuse of urinary catheterization during cesarean delivery: a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. J Perinatol. 2009 Jun;29(6):416-21. doi: 10.1038/jp.2009.4. Epub 2009 Feb 12. PubMed 19212327 ↗
  • Senanayake H. Elective cesarean section without urethral catheterization. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2005 Feb;31(1):32-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2005.00237.x. PubMed 15669989 ↗
  • Oliphant SS, Bochenska K, Tolge ME, Catov JM, Zyczynski HM. Maternal lower urinary tract injury at the time of Cesarean delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2014 Dec;25(12):1709-14. doi: 10.1007/s00192-014-2446-2. Epub 2014 Jun 26. PubMed 24964762 ↗
  • Phipps MG, Watabe B, Clemons JL, Weitzen S, Myers DL. Risk factors for bladder injury during cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jan;105(1):156-60. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000149150.93552.78. PubMed 15625157 ↗
  • Hansen BS, Soreide E, Warland AM, Nilsen OB. Risk factors of post-operative urinary retention in hospitalised patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011 May;55(5):545-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02416.x. Epub 2011 Mar 21. PubMed 21418152 ↗
  • Mulder FE, Schoffelmeer MA, Hakvoort RA, Limpens J, Mol BW, van der Post JA, Roovers JP. Risk factors for postpartum urinary retention: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2012 Nov;119(12):1440-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03459.x. Epub 2012 Aug 20. PubMed 22900796 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided — Not yet discussed

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Feb 2018 to primary completion in Jun 2018, 3 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Mar 12, 2018
First posted
Mar 27, 2018
StartActual
Feb 14, 2018
Primary completionActual
Jun 1, 2018
CompletionActual
Jun 1, 2018
Last update
Nov 4, 2021
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 4, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03479931
Collaborators
Randers Regional Hospital
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 27, 2018
Start date
Feb 14, 2018
Primary completion
Jun 1, 2018
Completion
Jun 1, 2018
Last update
Nov 4, 2021

Study contacts

Pinar Bor, MD, Ph.D.
study chair · Aarhus University and the Region Hospital of Randers

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Sep 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion