A Comparative Study of Epidural Anesthesia with Dexmedetomidine Infusion versus General Anesthesia for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.

BACKGROUND

There has been considerable debate regarding the ideal anaesthetic technique for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL). PCNL is usually performed under general anaesthesia (GA) in prone position. The prone position under GA is associated with various complications. To address these complications, our study was carried out to determine whether epidural anaesthesia [EA] with dexmedetomidine sedation can be a better alternative to GA for PCNL.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and feasibility of performing PCNL under EA in combination with dexmedetomidine infusion.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

Out of 225 patients observed in this study, 115 patients (group A) underwent PCNL under EA with dexmedetomidine infusion and 110 patients (group B) underwent PCNL under GA.

RESULTS

Mean time to the first dose of rescue analgesia was significantly increased in Epidural group (328.17 ± 63.74) compared to GA group (72.09 min, p < .0001) and the mean Visual analog scale [VAS] scores were significantly lower in epidural compared to GA group at different time intervals during the first 24 h after surgery (p<0.05). Patients in epidural group had significantly less post-operative nausea, vomiting (6.1 % vs 13.6 %), and significantly less shivering (12.2% vs 33.6%). Mean patient satisfaction score in epidural group was significantly higher (8.75 ± 1.29 vs 8.14 ± 1.39, p=0.001); however, the mean surgeon satisfaction score was comparable among the two groups (8.76 ± 1.39 in Group A and 8.61 ± 1.35 in Group B, p=0.421).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that EA is an equally effective alternative to GA for PCNL, with more patient satisfaction, less postoperative pain, early ambulation and postoperative recovery, less systemic analgesic requirements and less adverse effects.