Benoist 1999.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Dates study conducted: January 1994‐June 1997
Participants	Number of participants: eligible: not reported; 132 randomised; 126 reported Setting: Paris Country: France Population: mixed Age (mean (SD)): A 55 (18); B 56 (17) Inclusion criteria: patients undergoing extensive rectal resection (total or subtotal proctectomy) Condition for hospitalisation: rectal resection Exclusion criteria: patients receiving pre‐operative therapeutic antibiotics; suspected bladder tumour or urinary tract malignancies; previous IUC that ended < 48 h before insertion of the current catheter Use of antibiotic prophylaxis: as prophylaxis for bowel surgery, all patients were injected IV with a single dose of antibiotics on the induction of anaesthesia.
Interventions	Group A (n = 64): IUC removal 1 day post‐op Group B (n = 62): IUC removal 5 days post‐op Size of catheter used: 14F catheter Type of indwelling catheter: not reported Study definition of short‐term catheterisation (days): not reported Intended duration of catheterisation for each group: A: removal of IUC 1 day after surgery B: removal of IUC 5 days after surgery
Outcomes	AUR Chronic urinary retention UTI Long‐term urinary complications Patients undergoing total mesorectum excision
Definition of CAUTI or bacteriuria	Urinary infection was diagnosed if a culture yielded > 105 cfu/mL, with or without clinical symptoms
Sponsorship/funding	Not reported
Ethical approval	“…which was approved by the hospitals ethics committee”
Notes	AUR defined as absence of spontaneous micturition 12 h after catheter removal or after single intermittent catheterisation. Catheters were never clamped and were maintained on a closed drainage system.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “… patients were randomized into 1‐day or 5‐day urinary drainage groups according to the following computer‐generated randomization sequence.” Comment: adequate method of randomisation
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not reported Comment: unlikely blinding was possible
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not reported
Blinding of microbiological outcome (detection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “… urine samples from both groups were sent to a laboratory for culture” Comment: cultures were sent to a laboratory so it is unlikely that the microbiologist knew which samples corresponded to patients in the trial.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "...1 patient died postoperatively, 2 had postoperative complications requiring early reoperation, 2 inadvertently removed catheters, 1 required prolonged urine output monitoring because of transient respiratory failure requiring prolonged artificial ventilation." Comment: unclear what effect this has an the outcome of interest
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes reported in methods was reported in results. Protocol not available
Other bias	Low risk	Appears to be free from other sources of bias