Cargando…

Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic stability and blood loss reduction are subjects to further consideration in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNCL). OBJECTIVES: This study compared the preference of spinal anaesthesia (SA) or general anaesthesia (GA) in respect to mentioned concerns. PATIENT...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Movasseghi, Gholamreza, Hassani, Valiollah, Mohaghegh, Mahmood Reza, Safaeian, Reza, Safari, Saeid, Zamani, Mohammad Mahdi, Nabizadeh, Roya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kowsar 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3961021/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24660147
http://dx.doi.org/10.5812/aapm.13871
_version_ 1782308222795776000
author Movasseghi, Gholamreza
Hassani, Valiollah
Mohaghegh, Mahmood Reza
Safaeian, Reza
Safari, Saeid
Zamani, Mohammad Mahdi
Nabizadeh, Roya
author_facet Movasseghi, Gholamreza
Hassani, Valiollah
Mohaghegh, Mahmood Reza
Safaeian, Reza
Safari, Saeid
Zamani, Mohammad Mahdi
Nabizadeh, Roya
author_sort Movasseghi, Gholamreza
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic stability and blood loss reduction are subjects to further consideration in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNCL). OBJECTIVES: This study compared the preference of spinal anaesthesia (SA) or general anaesthesia (GA) in respect to mentioned concerns. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, 59 patients who underwent PCNL divided into SA and GA groups. 15-20 mg from intra-thecal bupivacaine 0.5%, and premedication of 0.01-0.02 mg from midazolam, were given to patients in SA group (n = 29). Patients in GA group (n = 30) received premedication of 1-2 µg/kg from fentanyl and 0.01-0.02 mg/kg from midazolam, and intravenously anaesthetized with 100 µg/kg/min of propofol and 0.5 mg/kg of atracurium, given by continuous infusion and N(2)O/O(2) 50%. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate were recorded intra-operatively and during recovery. RESULTS: MAP and heart rate show no significant differences at designated time points between two groups (P > 0.05). Surgery time, anesthesia time, bleeding volume, and analgesic intake were significantly reduced in SA group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: It seems that, in patients undergoing PNCL, SA is as effective and safe as GA. Patients who undergo PNCL under SA require smaller amounts of analgesic dose and show hemodynamic stability during surgery and recovery time. Also, SA technique provides decreased blood loss and shortened surgery as well as anesthesia times compared to GA.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3961021
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Kowsar
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39610212014-03-21 Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Movasseghi, Gholamreza Hassani, Valiollah Mohaghegh, Mahmood Reza Safaeian, Reza Safari, Saeid Zamani, Mohammad Mahdi Nabizadeh, Roya Anesth Pain Med Research Article BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic stability and blood loss reduction are subjects to further consideration in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNCL). OBJECTIVES: This study compared the preference of spinal anaesthesia (SA) or general anaesthesia (GA) in respect to mentioned concerns. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, 59 patients who underwent PCNL divided into SA and GA groups. 15-20 mg from intra-thecal bupivacaine 0.5%, and premedication of 0.01-0.02 mg from midazolam, were given to patients in SA group (n = 29). Patients in GA group (n = 30) received premedication of 1-2 µg/kg from fentanyl and 0.01-0.02 mg/kg from midazolam, and intravenously anaesthetized with 100 µg/kg/min of propofol and 0.5 mg/kg of atracurium, given by continuous infusion and N(2)O/O(2) 50%. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate were recorded intra-operatively and during recovery. RESULTS: MAP and heart rate show no significant differences at designated time points between two groups (P > 0.05). Surgery time, anesthesia time, bleeding volume, and analgesic intake were significantly reduced in SA group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: It seems that, in patients undergoing PNCL, SA is as effective and safe as GA. Patients who undergo PNCL under SA require smaller amounts of analgesic dose and show hemodynamic stability during surgery and recovery time. Also, SA technique provides decreased blood loss and shortened surgery as well as anesthesia times compared to GA. Kowsar 2013-12-26 /pmc/articles/PMC3961021/ /pubmed/24660147 http://dx.doi.org/10.5812/aapm.13871 Text en Copyright © 2014, Iranian Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ISRAPM); Published by Kowsar Corp. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Movasseghi, Gholamreza
Hassani, Valiollah
Mohaghegh, Mahmood Reza
Safaeian, Reza
Safari, Saeid
Zamani, Mohammad Mahdi
Nabizadeh, Roya
Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
title Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
title_full Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
title_fullStr Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
title_full_unstemmed Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
title_short Comparison Between Spinal and General Anesthesia in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
title_sort comparison between spinal and general anesthesia in percutaneous nephrolithotomy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3961021/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24660147
http://dx.doi.org/10.5812/aapm.13871
work_keys_str_mv AT movasseghigholamreza comparisonbetweenspinalandgeneralanesthesiainpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT hassanivaliollah comparisonbetweenspinalandgeneralanesthesiainpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT mohagheghmahmoodreza comparisonbetweenspinalandgeneralanesthesiainpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT safaeianreza comparisonbetweenspinalandgeneralanesthesiainpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT safarisaeid comparisonbetweenspinalandgeneralanesthesiainpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT zamanimohammadmahdi comparisonbetweenspinalandgeneralanesthesiainpercutaneousnephrolithotomy
AT nabizadehroya comparisonbetweenspinalandgeneralanesthesiainpercutaneousnephrolithotomy