Publication:
Is micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy surgery technically feasible and efficient under spinal anesthesia?

dc.contributor.authorKaratag, Tuna
dc.contributor.authorTepeler, Abdulkadir
dc.contributor.authorBuldu, Ibrahim
dc.contributor.authorAKÇAY, MUZAFFER
dc.contributor.authorTOSUN, MUHAMMED
dc.contributor.authorIstanbulluoglu, Mustafa Okan
dc.contributor.authorArmagan, Abdullah
dc.contributor.institutionauthorAKÇAY, MUZAFFER
dc.contributor.institutionauthorTOSUN, MUHAMMED
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-22T15:51:59Z
dc.date.available2020-10-22T15:51:59Z
dc.date.issued2015-06-01T00:00:00Z
dc.description.abstractThe objective of the study was to present the clinical and operative effects of two types of anesthesia on micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (-microperc-). We retrospectively reviewed 116 patients who underwent microperc between August 2011 and September 2013. Patients were sorted into one of the two groups according to the type of anesthesia received: general (Group 1, n:53) or spinal (Group 2, n:63). Perioperative variables (age, stone size, location) and outcomes (operation time, success, complication rate) were evaluated and compared. Although there was a statistically significant difference in the mean age of patients (30.3 +/- A 22.1 vs. 45.8 +/- A 14.6, respectively, p < 0.001), mean body mass indexes were similar (p = 0.689). There was no substantial difference in terms of sizes and localizations of stones in the two groups (p = 0.970 and p = 0.795). While a significant difference was found in comparison of operative times (59.62 +/- A 32.56 vs. 40.98 +/- A 26.45 min, p < 0.001), there was no statistically significant difference in mean fluoroscopy times (124.92 +/- A 84.2 vs. 105.2 +/- A 61.0 s, p = 0.441). Stone-free rates were similar (90.5 % vs. 93.6 %, p = 0.297). We found no statistical differences between the two groups with respect to mean hemoglobin drop and hospitalization time (p = 0.015 and p = 0.917, respectively). The complication rates and analog pain scores were also similar (p = 0.543 and p = 0.365). Our results show that microperc is a feasible surgical modality in the treatment of kidney stone disease under both spinal and general anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia may be considered for patients at a high risk for general anesthesia, and also may be an alternative for patients who are concerned about and/or fearful of general anesthesia.
dc.identifier.citationKaratag T., Tepeler A., Buldu I., AKÇAY M., TOSUN M., Istanbulluoglu M. O. , Armagan A., -Is micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy surgery technically feasible and efficient under spinal anesthesia?-, UROLITHIASIS, cilt.43, ss.249-254, 2015
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00240-015-0752-x
dc.identifier.scopus84939976839
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12645/23529
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000354722400009
dc.titleIs micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy surgery technically feasible and efficient under spinal anesthesia?
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.avesis.id3d0507cc-c73c-4a27-9df0-463cd762db0f
local.publication.isinternational1
relation.isAuthorOfPublication45d68bc0-abbf-4946-8bf4-1653e7a5f499
relation.isAuthorOfPublication640e700b-7444-4cdf-afd7-875530db0a6d
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery640e700b-7444-4cdf-afd7-875530db0a6d
Files