Could spinal anesthesia be a choice for retrograde intrarenal surgery

Objective: In this study, we aimed to compare cases of retrograde intrarenal surgery performed under spinal or general anesthesia through investigating relevant parameters for the first time in the literature. Material and method: In total, 86 patients with diagnosis of kidney stone who were treated by retrograde intrarenal surgery were included in this randomized controlled prospective study. In total, 43 of these operations were performed under spinal anesthesia (group I) and 43 were performed under general anesthesia (group II). The groups were compared in terms of demographic features, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, duration of operation, complication rates, postoperative visual analogue scale, postoperative hospitalization period, stone-free rates, and cost value ratios. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic findings, preoperative stone loads, postoperative stone-free rates, complication rates and postoperative hospitalization periods (p > 0.05). Postoperative visual analogue scale scores and cost value ratios were found statistically significantly lower in the spinal anesthesia group (group I) when compared with the general anesthesia group (group II; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Performing retrograde intrarenal surgery in the presence of spinal anesthesia is equally effective with general anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia also appears to be a more advantageous method due to statistically significantly lower mean postoperative pain scores and treatment cost value ratios.