Comparing the Side Effects of General versus Spinal Anesthesia in Transurethral Lithotripsy

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Assistant Professor , Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 General Practitioner, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

3 Student of Medicine, Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

4 Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

5 Specialist in Community Medicine, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Urinary tract stone is a common disease in urogenital system. The usual method for treatment of ureteral stones is transurethral lithotripsy (TUL). The aim of this study was to compare the side effects of spinal versus general anesthesia in transurethral lithotripsy.Methods: This was a randomized clinical trial study on 90 patients undergoing transurethral lithotripsy in Alzahra Hospital in Isfahan, Iran, during 2015-2016. Patients were divided in two groups of general and spinal anesthesia. Two groups were compared about operation and recovery time, surgeon and patient satisfaction, vital signs and complications of anesthesia type. Statistical analysis was performed using independent t, Mann-Whitney, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests via SPSS software. P-value < 0.05 considered significant.Findings: Recovery time was shorter in group receiving general anesthesia (104.2 ± 25.2 vs. 80.0 ± 24.4, P < 0.001), while the number of people in need of pethidine (42.0 vs. 21.0, P < 0.001) and also the dose of pethidine was higher in this group (5.3 ± 0.4 vs. 2.2 ± 0.4, P < 0.001). General anesthesia group reported higher rates of side effects as well (P = 0.010).Conclusion: The findings of this study imply fewer side effects in the use of spinal anesthesia for transurethral lithotripsy.

Keywords

References

  1. Stoller ML, Bolton DM. Urinary stone disease. In: Tanagho EA, McAninch JW, editors. Smith's general urology. 15th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2000. p. 291-311.
  2. Tanagho EA, McAninch JW, editors. Smith's general urology. 17th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2008.
  3. Tawfiek ER, Bagley DH. Management of upper urinary tract calculi with ureteroscopic techniques. Urology 1999; 53(1): 25-31.
  4. Attari MA, Mirhosseini SA, Honarmand A, Safavi MR. Spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia for elective lumbar spine surgery: A randomized clinical trial. J Res Med Sci 2011; 16(4): 524-9.
  5. Boon JM, Abrahams PH, Meiring JH, Welch T. Lumbar puncture: anatomical review of a clinical skill. Clin Anat 2004; 17(7): 544-53.
  6. Mehrabi S, Mousavi ZA, Akbartabar TM, Mehrabi F. General versus spinal anesthesia in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urol J 2013; 10(1): 756-61.
  7. Sadrolsadat SH, Mahdavi AR, Moharari RS, Khajavi MR, Khashayar P, Najafi A, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing the technique of spinal and general anesthesia for lumbar disk surgery: a study of 100 cases. Surg Neurol 2009; 71(1): 60-5.
  8. Kessous R, Weintraub AY, Wiznitzer A, Zlotnik A, Pariente G, Polachek H, et al. Spinal versus general anesthesia in cesarean sections: the effects on postoperative pain perception. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012; 286(1): 75-9.
  9. Naghibi K, Saryazdi H, Kashefi P, Rohani F. The comparison of spinal anesthesia with general anesthesia on the postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements after elective lower abdominal surgery: A randomized, double-blinded study. J Res Med Sci 2013; 18(7): 543-8.
  10. Chien I, Lu IC, Wang FY, Soo LY, Yu KL, Tang CS. Spinal process landmark as a predicting factor for difficult epidural block: a prospective study in Taiwanese patients. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2003; 19(11): 563-8.
  11. Khoshrang H, Falahatkar S, Heidarzadeh A, Abad M, Rastjou HN, Naderi NB. Predicting difficulty score for spinal anesthesia in transurethral lithotripsy surgery. Anesth Pain Med 2014; 4(4): e16244.
  12. Mulroy MF, Larkin KL, Hodgson PS, Helman JD, Pollock JE, Liu SS. A comparison of spinal, epidural, and general anesthesia for outpatient knee arthroscopy. Anesth Analg 2000; 91(4): 860-4.
  13. Movasseghi G, Hassani V, Mohaghegh MR, Safaeian R, Safari S, Zamani MM, et al. Comparison between spinal and general anesthesia in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Anesth Pain Med 2014; 4(1): e13871.
  14. Moawad HES, El Hefnawy AS. Spinal vs. general anesthesia for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A prospective randomized trial. Eg J Anaesth 2015; 31(1): 71-5.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 34, Issue 403 - Serial Number 403
September and October 2016
Pages 1231-1236

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 14 August 2016
  • Revise Date: 01 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics