Comparison of the efficacy of spinal and general anesthesia in retrograde intrarenal surgery

Abstract

This study aimed to compare spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) in terms of success rate, efficacy, reliability, and cost among patients diagnosed with renal stones and undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Between January 2018 and June 2021, 76 patients diagnosed with kidney stones and undergoing RIRS in our clinic were retrospectively evaluated. The groups were compared in terms of operative time, stone fragmentation time, intraoperative double-J stent requirement, length of hospital stay, requirement of additional procedures, stone-free rate, incidence of complications, and cost of anesthesia. When the groups were compared, the mean age and American Society of Anesthesiologists stage of the patients were statistically higher in the SA group than in the GA group (P = 0.009, P = 0.024). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of operative time, stone fragmentation time, intraoperative double-J stent requirement, length of hospital stay, requirement of additional procedures, and stone-free rate (P > 0.05). The cost of anesthesia was significantly lower in the SA group (P < 0.001). No statistically significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of the incidence of complications (P > 0.05). RIRS coupled with SA is a viable and effective option for treating renal stones. The success, stone-free, and complication rates are comparable to those observed in GA-administered RIRS. We prefer SA in patients with comorbidities and consider that it can be performed safely and successfully with both lower morbidity rates and much lower cost than GA.