R Shah1, A S Thapa2, N Lamichhane1, S R Kc1. 1. Department of Urology, College of Medical Sciences, Bharatpur, Nepal. 2. Department of Anesthesia, College of Medical Sciences, Bharatpur, Nepal.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Renal stone is one of the common entities occurring in our population. There are different treatment modalities of stones; out of those percutaneous nephrolithotomy is one of the most popular and effective for the renal and upper tract stones. This study is based to compare the safety and efficacy of spinal anaesthesia and general anaesthesia in PCNL. METHODS: In a randomized prospective study 60 patients were divided in two groups; group 1 (n=30) underwentPCNL in general anaesthesia and group 2 (n=30) underwent PCNL in spinal anaesthesia in prone position with the conventional technique. Demographic, operative data, post operative complications, patients' satisfaction rate and follow up complications were recorded and analyzed between two groups. RESULTS: Mean age in group 1 was 39.10±12.45years and 36.10±14.18 in group 2 (P=0.100). Mean stone size in group 1 was 3.75±1.27cm and 3.23±1.36cm in group 2 (P=0.129).Similarly the operative time was 89.10 ± 49.38 min and 62.53±35.91 min in group 1 and group 2 respectively (P=0.042). There was no significant difference between the complications regarding the anaesthesia. Post operative nausea and vomiting were significantly higher in group 1 and headache in group 2 (p=<0.001). Overall patient satisfaction rate was higher in group 2 then in group 1 (p=0.01). Hospital stay in group 1 was 5.27±1.87 days and 4.53±1.88 days in group 2 (p = 0.07). Stone success rate was similar in each group (p =0.50). CONCLUSIONS:Spinal anaesthesia is a safe and effective method in performing PCNL.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION:Renal stone is one of the common entities occurring in our population. There are different treatment modalities of stones; out of those percutaneous nephrolithotomy is one of the most popular and effective for the renal and upper tract stones. This study is based to compare the safety and efficacy of spinal anaesthesia and general anaesthesia in PCNL. METHODS: In a randomized prospective study 60 patients were divided in two groups; group 1 (n=30) underwent PCNL in general anaesthesia and group 2 (n=30) underwent PCNL in spinal anaesthesia in prone position with the conventional technique. Demographic, operative data, post operative complications, patients' satisfaction rate and follow up complications were recorded and analyzed between two groups. RESULTS: Mean age in group 1 was 39.10±12.45years and 36.10±14.18 in group 2 (P=0.100). Mean stone size in group 1 was 3.75±1.27cm and 3.23±1.36cm in group 2 (P=0.129).Similarly the operative time was 89.10 ± 49.38 min and 62.53±35.91 min in group 1 and group 2 respectively (P=0.042). There was no significant difference between the complications regarding the anaesthesia. Post operative nausea and vomiting were significantly higher in group 1 and headache in group 2 (p=<0.001). Overall patient satisfaction rate was higher in group 2 then in group 1 (p=0.01). Hospital stay in group 1 was 5.27±1.87 days and 4.53±1.88 days in group 2 (p = 0.07). Stone success rate was similar in each group (p =0.50). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anaesthesia is a safe and effective method in performing PCNL.
Entities:
Keywords:
general anaesthesia; percutaneous nephrolithotomy; spinal anaesthesia.