Cargando…

Clinical efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery in percutaneous nephrolithotripsy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the feasibility, safety, applied value and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for PCNL for the treatment of renal calculi. Although the ERAS is applied for many urological diseases, its application in percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) is still limited. MET...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Qing, Wan, Li, Liu, Shucheng, Li, Mingyong, Chen, Libo, Hou, Zhengwu, Zhang, Wang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7574411/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33081762
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12894-020-00728-w
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: To evaluate the feasibility, safety, applied value and efficacy of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for PCNL for the treatment of renal calculi. Although the ERAS is applied for many urological diseases, its application in percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) is still limited. METHODS: This was a prospective study of patients admitted to hospital January and December 2018 and who were only diagnosed with renal calculi and excepted for serious or uncontrollable basic diseases and patients with multiple operation history and medication history. Patients were randomized 1:1 to the ERAS and traditional operation groups starting on the day before operation and end on the day of discharge. Each group was 118 cases. The stone clearance rate, visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score, the occurrence of perirenal hematoma and effusion, the incidence of extravasation of urine, the incidence of fever, bleeding and blood transfusion, and postoperative hospital stay were observed. RESULTS: The stone clearance rates were similar between the two groups (ERAS: 93.2% (109/117) vs. traditional: 89.8% (106/118), P = 0.800). The operation time was similar in the two groups (ERAS: 54 ± 12 vs. traditional: 58 ± 11 min, P = 0.656). VAS pain score that was 0.79 ± 0.76 in the ERAS group at 4 h after surgery and was significantly lower than 2.79 ± 0.98 in the traditional group (P < 0.0001). The total complication rate was 15 cases in the ERAS group and 22 cases in the traditional group (P = 0.573). There were no difference in costs (21,348 ± 2404 vs. 21,597 ± 2293 RMB, P = 0.529). CONCLUSIONS: ERAS perioperative management in PCNL was feasible, was without additional complications, and had well economic and social benefits. It is worth of clinical promotion and application.