Comparison of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Under Regional versus General Anesthesia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

The aim of the present meta-analysis was to systematically examine the literature and to identify of the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of regional anesthesia (RA) versus general anesthesia (GA) for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). An exhaustive electronic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of science was performed until March 2018. Nine prospective RCTs concluding 858 patients comparing the use of RA to GA for PCNL were included. Combined results demonstrated that PCNL under RA could reduce operative time (mean difference [MD] -6.20; 95% CI -10.39 to -2.01), hospital stay (MD -0.59; 95% CI -0.74 to -0.45), visual analgesic score on the first and third postoperative day (MD -2.62, 95% CI -3.04 to -2.19 and MD -0.38; 95% CI -0.58 to -0.18) , analgesic requirements (MD -36.84; 95% CI -55.23 to -18.45), and nausea and/or vomiting (relative risk [RR] 0.28; 95% CI 0.13-0.61). There were no significant differences between RA and GA groups in terms of stone-free rate, blood transfusion, and postoperative fever rate. The results of subgroup analysis were basically consistent with the overall findings. Current evidence suggests that RA is an available and safe option in carefully evaluated and selected patients.

Keywords: Anesthesia; Efficacy; Percutaneous nephrolithotomy; Randomized controlled trials; Safety.