Effect of the Anesthetic Method on the Outcomes of Ureteroscopy for Proximal Ureteral Stones: A Multi-center Study of the Society of Urological Surgery Aegean Study Group

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridSahin, Mehmet/0000-0001-6712-7207
dc.authoridSahin, Mehmet/0000-0001-6162-0308
dc.authoridCihan, Ahmet/0000-0001-5586-8673
dc.authoridOngun, Sakir/0000-0002-8253-4086
dc.authoridErbatu, Oguzcan/0000-0002-2840-0028
dc.authoridcinar, onder/0000-0002-0107-5843
dc.authoridSahin, Mehmet Oguz/0000-0002-1985-9312
dc.contributor.authorKizilay, Fuat
dc.contributor.authorIrer, Bora
dc.contributor.authorSen, Volkan
dc.contributor.authorErbatu, Oguzcan
dc.contributor.authorOngun, Sakir
dc.contributor.authorYildiz, Alperen
dc.contributor.authorCinar, Onder
dc.date.accessioned2024-11-07T13:35:25Z
dc.date.available2024-11-07T13:35:25Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.departmentNiğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractObjective: To analyze the effect of the anesthesia method (spinal and general) on the outcome of ureteroscopy (URS) in patients treated for proximal ureteral stones. Materials and Methods: Patients, who underwent URS for proximal ureteral stones at various urology clinics in Turkiye, were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to the anesthesia method performed; the procedure was performed under spinal anesthesia (SA) in group 1 and general anesthesia (GA) in group 2. Patients' demographic, perioperative data and complication rates were compared between the two groups in a retrospective manner. Results: There were 309 and 329 patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. The mean stone area and Hounsfield unit in GA group were higher (p<0.001 and p=0.007, respectively). In the GA group, the need for double J stent was more frequent (p<0.001). In the SA group, the rate of push-back of stone into the collecting system was higher (13=0.017). According to the Clavien classification system and the others, complication rates were similar between the two groups (p>0.05). The rate of success of URS, which is accepted as complete stone-free status, was higher in the SA group (p=0.041). Conclusion: URS, which is used in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones, has a high success rate, independent of the anesthesia method used. It is important to keep in mind the patient's comorbidities prior to selecting the anesthesia method and that the stone area and the Hounsfield unit are the important factors affecting the outcomes.
dc.identifier.doi10.4274/jus.2123
dc.identifier.endpage175
dc.identifier.issn2148-9580
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.startpage170
dc.identifier.trdizinid306337
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4274/jus.2123
dc.identifier.urihttps://search.trdizin.gov.tr/tr/yayin/detay/306337
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11480/16488
dc.identifier.volume5
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000451975400005
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakTR-Dizin
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherGalenos Yayincilik
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Urological Surgery
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_20241106
dc.subjectUreteroscopy
dc.subjectUreteral stone
dc.subjectSpinal anesthesia
dc.subjectGeneral anesthesia
dc.subjectComplication
dc.titleEffect of the Anesthetic Method on the Outcomes of Ureteroscopy for Proximal Ureteral Stones: A Multi-center Study of the Society of Urological Surgery Aegean Study Group
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
TR-Dizin İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu