Dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl as adjuvant to propofol: comparative study in children undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

BACKGROUND: the present study was designed to compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl when combined with propofol during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in children. METHODS: fifty children aged 3-8 years, the American Society of Anesthesiologists status I and II, scheduled for elective extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy were randomly allocated to receive a loading dose 0.7 µg kg over 10 min followed by maintenance infusion 0.3 µg kg h of either dexmedetomidine in propofol/dexmedetomidine group or fentanyl in propofol/fentanyl group (n = 25 each). The target drug infusion rates were adjusted to keep the haemodynamics within ± 20% from the baseline values. All patients received propofol infusion to maintain bispectral index values (40-60) throughout the procedure. Induction and maintenance doses of propofol were recorded. Total doses of both studied drugs were calculated. Perioperative haemodynamics, incidence of intraprocedural and postprocedural complications and time to first analgesic requirement were recorded. RESULTS: the propofol requirement was significantly lower in the propofol/dexmedetomidine group than that in propofol/fentanyl group during induction and maintenance of anaesthesia (P < 0.0001). Total doses of fentanyl and dexmedetomidine were 0.961 (0.1) µg kg and 0.925 (0.07) µg kg, respectively. Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were significantly decreased compared to the baseline throughout the procedure in both groups and increased significantly relative to both baseline and the other group at 30 min in the propofol/fentanyl group and 60 min in the propofol/dexmedetomidine group in the recovery area (P < 0.05). In propofol/dexmedetomidine group, the incidence of intraprocedural hypoventilation was significantly lower (P = 0.016) and time to first analgesic requirement was significantly longer (P < 0.0001) than that in propofol/fentanyl group. CONCLUSION: both propofol/fentanyl and propofol/dexmedetomidine combinations at mentioned dose regimen were effective and well tolerated for children undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. However, propofol/dexmedetomidine combination was accompanied with less propofol consumption, prolonged analgesia and lower incidence of intraprocedural and postprocedural complications.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in impacted upper ureteral stones: a prospective randomized comparison between stented and non-stented techniques.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the need for pre-extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (pre-ESWL) stenting in management of impacted upper ureteral stones of size < or = 2 cm and to verify whether stenting would influence the success of therapy. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2008, a total of 60 patients with solitary, radio-opaque impacted upper ureteral stones measuring < or = 2 cm were divided into 2 equal groups: a stented group with a Double-J stent fixed pre-ESWL and a non-stented group treated by in situ ESWL. All patients were treated by ESWL using Dornier Doli S lithotripter. Results were compared in terms of clearance rates, number of shock waves and sessions, morbidity, and incidence of complications. Pretreatment KUB (kidneys, ureters, and bladder) and intravenous pyelogram and post-treatment KUB were used to evaluate fragmentation and clearance. RESULTS: Overall stone-free rate was 88.3%. No significant statistical difference was observed in stone-free rate between the stented and non-stented groups being 90% and 86.7%, respectively (P = .346). One session was required in 28.3% of patients, whereas multiple sessions were required in 71.7% of patients. No significant statistical difference was noted in re-treatment rate in the 2 groups. Patients in the stented group significantly complained of side effects attributable to the stent predominantly dysuria, urgency, frequency, and suprapubic pain. CONCLUSIONS: ESWL is an effective and reasonable initial therapy in the management of impacted upper ureteral stones measuring < or = 2 cm. Pre-ESWL ureteral stenting provides no additional benefit over in situ ESWL. Moreover, ureteral stents are associated with significant patient discomfort and morbidity.

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in horseshoe kidneys: is rigid nephroscopy sufficient tool for complete clearance? A case series study.

BACKGROUND: this study represents a case series to evaluate how successful is the rigid percutaneous nephroscopy as a tool for clearance of all stones in various locations in horseshoe kidneys. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2009, we carried out PCNL (percutaneous nephrolithotomy) for calculi in horseshoe kidneys in 21 renal units (17 patients) in our department. The indications were large stone burden in 18 units and failed SWL(shock wave lithotripsy) in 3 renal units. All procedures were done under general anesthesia; using fluoroscopic guidance for localization and standard alkan dilatation followed by rigid nephroscopy and stone extraction with or without stone disintegration. We analyzed our results regarding the site and number of the required access, the intra and postoperative complications, the presence of any residual stones, as well as their location. RESULTS: The procedure was completed, using a single access tract in 20 renal units, with the site of puncture being the upper calyx in nine units and the posterior middle calyx in eleven units. Only in one renal unit, two access tracts (an upper and a lower calyceal) were required for completion and a supracostal puncture was required in another case. There was no significant intraoperative bleeding and no blood transfusion was required in any patient. A pelvic perforation occurred in one case, requiring longer PCN (percutaneous nephrostomy) drainage. One patient with infection stones suffered urosepsis postoperatively which was successfully managed. Three cases had residual stones, all located in the renal isthmus, all residuals were un approachable with the rigid instrument; resulting in a overall stone-free rate of 85.7% at discharge. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy is generally safe and successful in the management of stones in horseshoe kidneys. However, location of the stones in these patients is crucial to decide the proper tool for optimal stone clearance result.

Safety and efficacy of supracostal access in percutaneous renal surgery.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: During percutaneous renal surgery, subcostal access is preferred because it carries no risk of injury to either the lungs or pleura. However, in some situations, a supracostal approach may provide more direct access and achieve a more satisfactory result than the subcostal approach. In this prospective study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of supracostal approaches in percutaneous renal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2004 and 2006, 30 patients underwent percutaneous renal surgery with a supracostal approach either as the sole or as a secondary access. The indications were staghorn stones, upper caliceal stones, upper ureteral stones, secondary ureteropelvic junction obstruction, disturbed lower caliceal anatomy, and high-lying kidneys. The puncture was above the eleventh rib in six procedures and above the twelfth rib in 24 procedures. All patients were examined for equal air entry on both sides of the chest, and all had chest radiography performed immediately after surgery to exclude pneumothorax or hydrothorax. Bleeding was assessed with evaluation of preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin, levels and vital signs; urine was also examined for gross hematuria. A routine nephrostogram was obtained for all patients. RESULTS: Supracostal was the sole access in 63.3% of patients and a secondary access in 36.7% of patients. Intraoperatively, bleeding occurred in one patient. Hydrothorax in another patient necessitated insertion of an intercostal chest drain. A renopleural fistula developed in another patient 2 days postoperatively that necessitated placement of a chest drain and Double J stent. Access in both patients with pleural complications had been above the eleventh rib. The mean drop in hemoglobin level was 0.79 +/- 0.72 g/dL. Our overall stone-free rate was 88.9%. CONCLUSION: Supracostal access above the twelfth rib is relatively safe; however, access above the eleventh rib should be limited to necessity because a higher incidence of pleural complications can be expected. A chest radiograph should be obtained immediately postoperatively for early detection of hydrothorax or pneumothorax.