Cure Medical intermittent catheters tryouts

Yes, I did try a non-hydrophillic Coloplast catheter. It's soft and comfortable, just like Cure. What well known catheters are made of latex ?

There are some really fundamental mechanical issues with catheters.

They have to be flexible, firm and thin at the end to navigate through the urethra. This somehow seems to result in a thin hard tip that can and does cause internal injuries.

I use a Coloplast Flexicath and have found the the thin hard tip has been injuring my bladder internally and causing repeat UTIs. It is not helped by putting the drainage holes about 3 cm away from the tip, which means it has to be inserted further risking damage. (My UTI rate is 3-per year ..)

I previously used a Hydrosil Gripper. It was causing one testicle infection per year. Most likely because it has a blunt nose which can open the Epidydimus which can spread infections to the testicles.

I am string to wonder if SNS is a better option.

What is SNS ? Have you tried Cure, or Mckesson straight catheters 14fr ? They are much better, at least for me.

Hi Hank

I'm glad to see you are here. I really miss JimJames remarks and insights but you're good too.

I've been using Coloplast for about two years now. I've never heard of Mckesson. I'll have to look that up. I've tried some Cure hydrophillic. I didn't like them as much because of the step of having to break open the liquid before opening. No large deal, but when you're cathing 4-5 times a day it is something. So, do you think there is something to the Cure advertisements regarding that cancer-causing materials NOT used in theirs? It is definitely a big advertising item on their website. I worry sometimes about the eyelets on the catheters pinching the inside wall of the bladder and urethra. I can feel it doing so when I run dry. My Urologist mentioned it once but didn't seem to think it was serious. He smiled and said yes, you can see little hickies on the inside of the urinary tract.

One thing I've notice is that if I wait until I am having pretty strong urges - typically 4-6 hours in between, but it can be as little as 45 minutes - that it is usually easier to get into the bladder. Its almost as if it was a dam with pressure that is ready to burst. Thank goodness my aphincter muscle in there acan still hold it back, If I try to insert a catheter when I'm not really feeling any urge to pee, it seems much harder. I just have to be more careful.

I usually use the Covidien Dover red latex catheters, but have also used ones manufactured by Bard.

Is latex also called rubber ?

Yes latex is natural rubber.

Thanks. I will try it out.

Hi Keith, I miss Jimjames a lot too. We had many jokes, so much fun, and also many fights. We both agree that CIC is a good thing. but Jim seemed not too see many problems with CIC and ended up overselling it.

McKesson is almost as soft and comfy as Cure but cheaper. As far as eyelet catching the inside of your urethra, Cure is advertised as having smooth, polished eyelets and I don't feel the scratch. I might have felt that when trying out another brand.

Re cancer, Howard just recently opened a thread about cancer and CIC. I don't know if he found out any more information.

I usually use Cure straight non-hydrophilic catheter, M14. I just open the package, dip it into a tall test tube containing lubrication liquid. I picked this up from someone else on this forum.

You are right, it's easier to insert when the bladder is not too low on urine. It was definitely the case when I was using the stiff green Coloplast Speedicath. With Cure, it's not much a problem anymore.

"Over selling it" ... but you're still doing it. Have you had any surgery? I didn't think you had.

I was looking into Holep seriously at the beginning of the year because I about had it with CIC and bleeding, until someone on this forum mentioned Cure favorably. I decided to take the online free trial and as you know, I am back with CIC again.

Re "overselling", some people on this forum suggest CIC for every situation, and that it's so easy, with no risks. Jim once even suggested CIC for to man that had lost use of both hands. 😀

CIC is not the only thing that was oversold. The same thing happened with Urolift, FLA, Rezum, etc. with different champions.

CIC did help me to avoid a TUrp and a Urolift, which now looking back, would not give me good results. So for now I will stay with it until either I'd have problems doing it, have to do it too often, or a correct procedure comes along.

I'm just the opposite of you and Hank when it comes to a full bladder. I find that I meet more resistance just before the catheter goes into the bladder when my bladder is fuller. I just keep a steady pressure until it enters the bladder. I don't try to force it, as I am afraid of causing an injury.

With respect to the Cure hydrophilic catheters, I tried some not long ago. Like you, I don't like having to break the water packet. I also don't care for the thin plastic gripper sleeve, and I didn't find them as slick as some of the other brands of hydrophilic catheters.

<<CIC did help me to avoid a TUrp and a Urolift, which now looking back, would not give me good results>>

How do you know this? Don't get me wrong; I'm not advocating TUrp or Urolift. I really don't know. Just asking. I'm confronting that now.

I went to my urologist yesterday. Had a follow up blood test 4 days prior and my psa is about 6.7. He said "its probably nothing" and we talked about cic. He seemed to think that it was unusual that I'd been doing cic for two years and seemed to believe it was unnecessary when there was "such a good option available" (speaking of TUrp) He says its the "gold standard". This is the same doctor that was going to have me in surgery two years ago with GL. Now he says he would not do GL on me but thinks I should go with TUrp. It wasn't clear to me why he has changed his mind on that. Could be that it seemed more urgent back then or that this more recent DRE convinced him that procedure would be better. I don't know. I've been closely following this forum and I do get the impression that TUrp seems to work pretty well for many men. My Uro almost has me convinced. Of course he minimized the down sides of surgery and also sort of marginalized the new procedures. He made the point that Derek makes on this forum that the prostate will keep growing and he would rather operate on someone my age (67) than someone in his late 70s. He thinks I would be much happier having the TUrp. I definitely have an enlarged prostate but he thinks the surgery would at least cut my retention in half. I'm still pondering all this. Didn't commit to anything. He didn't think knowing the exact size of my prostate is that important; sort of deflected my from talking about free psa. He definitely didn't like the procedure where they cut the blood flow to the prostate so some of it would die. He thought that was quite dangerous and he was pretty convincing. Just going to keep doing cic for now.

Hi pluff, I agree with Keith that nearly empty bladder makes it difficult to self cath. But I also agree with you that too full a bladder is not good either. Something in between is probably best.

Regarding not wanting to break the water packet, all I can say is both you and Keith are rottenly spoiled. 😀 Just think about other people that would need 20, 30 minutes to self cath. In my case, couple extra minutes for a bloodless cath is a no brainer.

Hi Keith, both your doctor and Derek are right. There are so many procedures out there that for most people, there is a better choice than self cathing. The question is which procedure has a best chance of success for an individual. Most failures I would say come from picking the wrong procedure, and some doctors are not good at recommending the correct one either.

Your doctor is correct in saying that TURP will lower your retention. As far as results are concerned, it is very good in improvement of flow (~15 ml/s) and retention (~175ml). However, it has high risk for RE, which I am not too concerned. But I don't like the high blood loss and long recovery time. On the other hand, if it's bipolar/ button TURP, it's much better but it's still relatively new. Ask your doctor if he does bipolar/button.

Re Urolift, it's not very good if you have significant retention or low flow. According to trial data, it would improve your flow by 3.7ml/s, which is a trickle. As far as retention, it has almost zero improvement. It was why I knew ahead that it woud not help me.

I don't know about being "rottenly spoiled". 😃 I am 99% self lubricating. I haven't had a UTI, so Medicare won't pay for hydrophilic catheters. I do keep carry some for convenience when traveling, and I just don't find the Cure ones as convenient to use for that purpose, compared to some of the other brands.

Is it true that Medicare will not pay for hydrophilic catheters ? Even if you have a prescription ? It's a very important information. I currently have Medicare Advantage with Sharp and they agree to pay for hydrophilic catheters but with the 20% copay on the jacked up prices, I end up paying the same as I would if I pay cash, so I pay cash for them, without going through insurance.

I was told by my supplier that Medicare has two different reimbursement rates for non lubricated and hydrophilic catheters. You have to have a prescription for hydrophilic catheters. In order for a doctor to write a prescription for hydrophilic ones, there has to be justification for doing so, such having two UTIs in a year. Between Medicare and my Tricare for Life plan, my non lubricated catheters and lube are fully covered. I was told that I could order hydrophilic ones and pay the differential. I don't do it. I have purchased some of the Coloplast compact hydrophilic catheters for convenience when traveling. Like you, I get them from a difference source, as I only buy them a few at a time and the price is discounted.

Medicare Part B pays for 80% of catheters up to 150 a month. You have to have a medigap policy to cover the other 20%.

Sorry to tell you man, you shouldn't have gone for Medicare Advantage. Its the insurance companies inserting themselves in between you and your rightful medicare that you've probably paid for all your life They use your medicare like a supplement to their policy. Not a bad deal but medicare is better. At least at this point. The Republicans have plans to drill more holes in medicare to allow for- profit entities to get a cut. I already pay close to $300 a month for medicare and a medigap plan; but its really good coverage.

I was thinking about switching to just plain Medicare next year so I can get 150 hydrophilic Cure catheters a month for free, because a supplier I know told me that they would cover my 20% copay. However, if Medicare is going to cause trouble to my doctor because of UTI, I might not be able to get a prescription for the hydrophilics. I'll just stay with my Advantage.

Thanks Keith, but in my case, Advantage is better. I am paying only about $150 for Medicare a month. I get all my meds for free, pay $10 to see my doctor, $35 to see specialists, free vision, free gym which I don't use, get catheters with 20% copay just like Medicare. Now what do you think ? 😀