Cargando…
Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment?
INTRODUCTION: We investigated the clinical, operational, and pain parameters of patients who underwent semirigid ureterorenoscopy (sURS) under spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) for proximal ureter stones. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients treated with sURS after diagnosis of proximal u...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Polish Urological Association
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7587490/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33133662 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2020.0049 |
_version_ | 1783600183983996928 |
---|---|
author | Topaktaş, Ramazan Altin, Selçuk Aydin, Cemil Akkoç, Ali Ürkmez, Ahmet Aydin, Zeynep Banu |
author_facet | Topaktaş, Ramazan Altin, Selçuk Aydin, Cemil Akkoç, Ali Ürkmez, Ahmet Aydin, Zeynep Banu |
author_sort | Topaktaş, Ramazan |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: We investigated the clinical, operational, and pain parameters of patients who underwent semirigid ureterorenoscopy (sURS) under spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) for proximal ureter stones. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients treated with sURS after diagnosis of proximal ureter stones between January 2014 and May 2017 were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups (the SA group and the GA group) based on the type of anesthesia used. Perioperative variables and operation results were evaluated and compared. Success was defined as the patient being stone-free as observed on low-dose non-contrast computed tomography performed in the first month postoperatively. RESULTS: The SA and GA groups had 40 and 32 patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of age (p = 0.593), gender (p = 0.910), average stone size (p = 0.056), side (p = 0.958), or density (p = 0.337). Based on the Clavien classification system, complication rates between the two groups were similar. The postoperative visual pain scale in the SA group was statistically significantly lower (p <0.05) than in the GA group. Success rates in the SA and GA groups were found to be 90% (36/40) and 93.7% (30/32), respectively, with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.819). CONCLUSIONS: Ureterorenoscopy, which is performed for proximal ureter stone treatment in adult patients, is a reliable surgical method that can be performed under both SA and GA. SA offers the advantage of reduced postoperative pain as compared to GA. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7587490 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Polish Urological Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75874902020-10-30 Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? Topaktaş, Ramazan Altin, Selçuk Aydin, Cemil Akkoç, Ali Ürkmez, Ahmet Aydin, Zeynep Banu Cent European J Urol Original Paper INTRODUCTION: We investigated the clinical, operational, and pain parameters of patients who underwent semirigid ureterorenoscopy (sURS) under spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) for proximal ureter stones. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients treated with sURS after diagnosis of proximal ureter stones between January 2014 and May 2017 were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups (the SA group and the GA group) based on the type of anesthesia used. Perioperative variables and operation results were evaluated and compared. Success was defined as the patient being stone-free as observed on low-dose non-contrast computed tomography performed in the first month postoperatively. RESULTS: The SA and GA groups had 40 and 32 patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of age (p = 0.593), gender (p = 0.910), average stone size (p = 0.056), side (p = 0.958), or density (p = 0.337). Based on the Clavien classification system, complication rates between the two groups were similar. The postoperative visual pain scale in the SA group was statistically significantly lower (p <0.05) than in the GA group. Success rates in the SA and GA groups were found to be 90% (36/40) and 93.7% (30/32), respectively, with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.819). CONCLUSIONS: Ureterorenoscopy, which is performed for proximal ureter stone treatment in adult patients, is a reliable surgical method that can be performed under both SA and GA. SA offers the advantage of reduced postoperative pain as compared to GA. Polish Urological Association 2020-06-15 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7587490/ /pubmed/33133662 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2020.0049 Text en Copyright by Polish Urological Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Topaktaş, Ramazan Altin, Selçuk Aydin, Cemil Akkoç, Ali Ürkmez, Ahmet Aydin, Zeynep Banu Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? |
title | Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? |
title_full | Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? |
title_fullStr | Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? |
title_short | Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? |
title_sort | is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment? |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7587490/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33133662 http://dx.doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2020.0049 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT topaktasramazan isspinalanesthesiaanalternativeandfeasiblemethodforproximalureteralstonetreatment AT altinselcuk isspinalanesthesiaanalternativeandfeasiblemethodforproximalureteralstonetreatment AT aydincemil isspinalanesthesiaanalternativeandfeasiblemethodforproximalureteralstonetreatment AT akkocali isspinalanesthesiaanalternativeandfeasiblemethodforproximalureteralstonetreatment AT urkmezahmet isspinalanesthesiaanalternativeandfeasiblemethodforproximalureteralstonetreatment AT aydinzeynepbanu isspinalanesthesiaanalternativeandfeasiblemethodforproximalureteralstonetreatment |