Two studies presented at the European Association of Urology (EAU) 2026 Annual Meeting suggest reusable, intermittent catheter strategies may offer a safe alternative to single-use devices for some patients with urinary retention, without worsening risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) or overall quality of life. 

In the first study, researchers in the United Kingdom randomized 578 community-dwelling adults who used intermittent catheters to either a mixed-use strategy — combining reusable and single-use catheters — or single-use catheters alone for 12 months. 

At least one microbiologically confirmed symptomatic UTI occurred in 49 of 171 patients (28.7%) in the mixed-use group and 84 of 244 (34.4%) in the single-use group. The unadjusted odds ratio was 0.77 (95% CI, 0.50-1.17), which met the study’s prespecified noninferiority threshold.

Antibiotic use was 35% lower in the mixed-use group (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.95). Catheter-related outcomes, quality of life, and adverse events were otherwise similar, although catheter “sticking” was more common with reusable devices.

Based on these findings, the researchers concluded that “self-directed use of reusable and single-use catheters is as safe as using only single-use catheters for UTI and is associated with lower antibiotic use,” and that “reusable catheters can be offered as a choice for intermittent catheter users.”

The second study, from the multicenter COMPaRE trial, followed 386 patients with urinary retention. Participants used either reusable or single-use catheters and completed validated quality-of-life surveys over time.

Of that group, 290 completed 12-months of follow-up, including 177 in the single-use arm and 113 in the reusable arm. The mean age in the study was 61 years, 63% were male, and 36% had neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks, 26 weeks, and 52 weeks using the ISC-Q, InCaSa-Q, SF-Qualiveen, and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires. 

At 1 year, patients using reusable catheters reported greater confidence and comfort on one measure, while those using single-use devices reported higher satisfaction with ease of use. Overall health-related quality of life was similar between groups.

The study authors concluded that “quality of life and satisfaction were comparable between both arms, indicating that reusable catheters do not compromise patient experience.”

US Practice Still Favors Single-Use 

In the United States, single-use catheters have remained the standard for nearly two decades, largely due to reimbursement policy.

“Until 2008, the standard of care in the United States was to use reusable catheters,” said Jason Kim, MD, co-director of Women’s Pelvic Health and Continence Center at Stony Brook Medicine in New York. Kim was not involved in the studies. 

Beginning in April 2008, Medicare changed its policy to cover up to 200 single-use catheters per month, up from only four, driving a shift away from reusing intermittent catheters in the United States. 

Kim said the new findings are important but do not address key day-to-day challenges.

“I think one of the big issues with reusable catheters is they have to be cleaned appropriately between uses,” Kim said. “That can be a burden, especially if people are using them in public bathrooms.” 

Many single-use devices are hydrophilic or pre-lubricated, making them easier to use, Kim said. 

“The single-use catheters are actually probably more comfortable and easy to use,” he said. 

Who Might Be a Candidate? 

Some clinicians said reusable catheters may be reasonable for selected patients who can manage the added steps.

“The ideal patient for catheter reuse would be an individual who is immunocompetent and a non-smoker, without additional infection risk factors, with good dexterity and reliable technique,” said Glenn Werneburg, MD, PhD, a urogynecology and reconstructive pelvic surgery fellow at the University of Michigan. Werneburg was not involved in the study. 

Indeed, Wai Lee, MD, division chief of urogynecology and reconstructive pelvic surgery at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, said patient training and adherence to cleaning protocols are important for safe use. 

“The protocol requires the patient to store the reusable catheter in an antiseptic solution and rinse in cold water prior to use,” said Lee, who was not involved in the study. “This regimen requires a patient who can express comfort and confidence in following this regimen as well as somebody with adequate manual dexterity.”

He said he evaluates patients’ technique before recommending a switch.

Balancing Cost, Environment, and Convenience 

Clinicians said the decision often comes down to balancing convenience with other factors such as cost or environmental concerns. 

Lee said some patients may prefer a mixed approach.

“I imagine a hybrid scenario where patients may prefer the reusable catheters at home and may carry single-use catheters when they leave the house,” said Lee. 

Kim said that while the data are unlikely to “shift paradigms in the US,” the findings suggest reusable options could reasonably be discussed with patients and the decision may ultimately come down to informed patient choice.

“The reusable catheter strategies appear to be safe and may reduce antibiotic use and can maintain the quality of life of patients,” he said. “But there’s also some trade-offs in convenience so I think it’s all about shared decision making.” 

Werneburg reported serving as a consultant for Atterx Biotherapeutics, Clarametyx Biosciences, Pathnostics, Coloplast, Light Line Medical; on the medical advisory board for Renascent Diagnostics. No other conflicts of interest were reported. 

Lara Salahi is a health journalist based in Boston.