Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment?

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridTopaktaş, Ramazan / 0000-0003-3729-3284
dc.authorwosidTopaktaş, Ramazan / ABH-8184-2020
dc.contributor.authorTopaktaş, Ramazan
dc.contributor.authorAltın, Selçuk
dc.contributor.authorAydın, Cemil
dc.contributor.authorAkkoç, Ali
dc.contributor.authorÜrkmez, Ahmet
dc.contributor.authorAydın, Zeynep Banu
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-01T15:05:14Z
dc.date.available2021-11-01T15:05:14Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.departmentHitit Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü
dc.departmentHitit Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Dahili Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü
dc.description.abstractIntroduction 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.
dc.identifier.citationTopaktaş, R., Altin, S., Aydin, C., Akkoç, A., Ürkmez, A., & Aydin, Z. B. (2020). Is spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment?. Central European Journal of Urology, 73(3), 336.
dc.identifier.doi10.5173/ceju.2020.0049
dc.identifier.endpage341en_US
dc.identifier.issn2080-4806
dc.identifier.issn2080-4873
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.pmid33133662
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85092006167
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3
dc.identifier.startpage336en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5173/ceju.2020.0049
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11491/7184
dc.identifier.volume73en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000577891700014
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.institutionauthorAydın, Cemil
dc.institutionauthorAydın, Zeynep Banu
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPolish Urological Assoc
dc.relation.ispartofCentral European Journal Of Urology
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectFeasibilityen_US
dc.subjectGeneral anesthesiaen_US
dc.subjectProximal ureter stoneen_US
dc.subjectSpinal anesthesiaen_US
dc.subjectUreterorenoscopyen_US
dc.titleIs spinal anesthesia an alternative and feasible method for proximal ureteral stone treatment?
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim
İsim:
cemil-aydin2020.pdf
Boyut:
615.34 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Makale Koleksiyonu
Makale Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu