<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> We investigated the efficacy of a urethral catheter alone for intraperitoneal perforation during transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT). <b><i>Patients and Methods:</i></b> We retrospectively evaluated the medical records of 4,543 patients who underwent TURBT from January 2000 to December 2017 using the Clinical Data Warehouse system. The clinicopathologic characteristics, recurrence-free survival, and progression-free survival were compared between the patient groups with intraperitoneal perforation treated with the Foley catheter alone, extraperitoneal perforation, and matched control TURBT. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Intraperitoneal perforation and extraperitoneal perforation were observed in 16 (35.6%) and 29 (64.4%) patients, respectively. In the intraperitoneal perforation group, 11 (68.8%), 2 (12.5%), and 3 (18.8%) patients were treated with the Foley catheter alone, additional percutaneous drainage, and delayed open surgery, respectively. The use of the Foley catheter alone in patients with intraperitoneal perforation of smaller size than the cystoscope or no pelvic radiotherapy history showed improved efficacy without sequelae or therapeutic delay. One of the 2 patients with the size of the intraperitoneal perforation larger than the cystoscope was successfully treated with the Foley catheter alone, whereas the other patient underwent delayed surgical repair. There was no difference in recurrence-free survival and progression-free survival of the intraperitoneal perforation treated with the Foley catheter alone compared to those of the matched control TURBT (<i>p</i> = 0.909, <i>p</i> = 0.518) and the extraperitoneal perforation (<i>p</i> = 0.458, <i>p</i> = 0.699). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Intraperitoneal perforation rarely occurred during TURBT. In the case of intraperitoneal perforation of size smaller than cystoscopy or without pelvic radiotherapy history, treatment with the Foley alone showed successful improvement and safe oncological results. Therefore, treatment with the urethral catheter alone can be carefully considered when an intraperitoneal perforation smaller than the cystoscope size or without pelvic radiotherapy history occurs.
The impact of radical pelvic radiotherapy on nutrient intake
