A case report of three people experiencing intractable autonomic dysreflexia following instillation of Uro-Tainer® Polyhexanide 0.02.

INTRODUCTION: Historically, bladder washouts were used to instil therapeutic reagents directly into the bladder. This practice has expanded to include instillation of solutions that deal with catheter issues such as encrustation or formation of bio-film. They appear to provide a promising strategy for people with long term catheters. These products are readily available to purchase, but there is concern that people are using these solutions without a complete understanding of the purpose for the rinse and without clinical guidance to monitor response to treatment. CASE PRESENTATION: These case studies include three people living with spinal cord injury (SCI) who developed severe autonomic dysreflexia (AD) when a catheter rinse was carried out using a particular solution. Each of the cases developed immediate and, in some cases, intractable AD requiring further intervention to resolve symptoms. DISCUSSION: Catheter-associated urinary tract infection is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in people living with SCI. Long-term catheters provide a vector for opportunistic micro-organisms to form bio-film and create an environment that promotes formation of struvite calculi, thus increasing the risk of chronic catheter blockage and urinary tract infection. Whilst these solutions are used to reduce these risks, they also pose additional risks to people susceptible to AD. These cases highlight the need for judicious patient selection and clinical oversight and management of adverse events when using catheter rinse solutions in certain people living with SCI. This is supported by a decision-making algorithm and a response to AD algorithm. This case report was prepared following the CARE Guidelines (supplementary file 1).

Are micro enemas administered with a squeeze tube and a 5 cm-long nozzle as good or better than micro enemas administered with a 10 cm-long catheter attached to a syringe in people with a recent spinal cord injury? A non-inferiority, crossover randomised controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN: Double blind, non-inferiority crossover randomised controlled trial. OBJECTIVES: To determine if micro enemas administered with a squeeze-tube and a 5 cm-long nozzle (squeeze-tube method) are as good or better than micro enemas administered with a 10 cm-long catheter attached to a syringe (catheter method) in people with a recent spinal cord injury. SETTING: Two inpatient spinal cord injury units located in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: Twenty people admitted to hospital with recent spinal cord injury were randomly assigned to two treatment sequences; 4 weeks of micro enemas delivered by the squeeze-tube method followed by 4 weeks of micro enemas delivered by the catheter method, or vice versa. Each treatment sequence was 8 weeks with a crossover at the end of week 4. The primary outcome was time to complete bowel care. Secondary outcomes reflected faecal incontinence, quality of life, perception of treatment effectiveness and participant reported time to complete bowel care. The primary and secondary outcomes were measured by blinded assessors in week 4 and week 8. A non-inferiority margin of 10 min for time to complete bowel care was set a priori. RESULTS: The mean between group difference (95% confidence interval) for the time to complete bowel care was -0.5 min (-2.8 to 1.8), where a negative value favours the catheter method. Results were similar for all secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Micro enemas delivered by the squeeze-tube method are as good or better than micro enemas delivered by the catheter method in people with a recent spinal cord injury.