EAJAIC
Eurasian Journal of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care

The Eurasian Journal of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care (EAJAIC) is an independent-unbiased, peer-reviewed, "double-blind", and open-access journal of current national and international issues and reviews for original clinical and experimental research, interesting case reports, differential diagnoses, editorial opinions, letters to the editor, and educational papers in anesthesiology, algology, and intensive care medicine.

ISSN: Active
eISSN: 3023-6738
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.
EndNote Style

Online Manuscript System

Index
Original Article
Comparative impact of general and epidural anesthesia on postoperative outcomes in percutaneous nephrolithotomy
Abstract
Aims: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of epidural anesthesia (EA) versus general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).
Methods: This retrospective observational study included 50 patients who underwent PCNL under either EA or GA. The groups were compared regarding demographic data, intraoperative and postoperative parameters, including hemodynamic stability, bleeding, complications, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, and postoperative analgesic requirements.
Results: No significant differences were found between groups in terms of demographics, stone location, or size. Fluid requirement was significantly higher in the EA group (p<0.01). Although intraoperative bleeding and hypotension were more frequent in the GA group, differences were not statistically significant. Peak heart rate at the 10th minute was significantly higher in the GA group (p<0.05), and systolic and diastolic blood pressures were lower at some time points (p<0.05). Oxygen saturation was significantly higher in the GA group at the 5th minute only (p<0.01). Postoperative VAS scores were significantly lower in the EA group (p<0.01), and analgesic need was higher in the GA group. Ephedrine use was greater in the EA group (p<0.05), with no significant difference in atropine use or catheter site.
Conclusion: EA is a safe and effective alternative to GA for PCNL procedures, as it provides superior postoperative pain control, reduces analgesic requirements, and maintains hemodynamic stability. Although EA is associated with higher fluid and ephedrine requirements, its overall benefits make it a viable option for appropriately selected patients.

Keywords : Epidural anesthesia, general anesthesia, hemodynamic stability, percutaneous nephrolithotomy, postoperative pain control

Download Article


1. Türk C, Petrík A, Sarica K, et al. EAU Guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):475-482. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041
2. Khalili P, Jamali Z, Sadeghi T, et al. Risk factors of kidney stone disease: a cross-sectional study in the southeast of Iran. BMC Urol. 2021;21(1): 141. doi:10.1186/s12894-021-00905-5
3. Fernström I, Johansson B. Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 1976;10(3):257-259. doi:10.1080/21681805.1976.11882084
4. Ganpule AP, Vijayakumar M, Malpani A, Desai MR. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) a critical review. Int J Surg. 2016;36(Pt D): 660-664. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.11.028
5. Geraghty RM, Jones P, Somani BK. Worldwide Trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol. 2017;31(6):547-556. doi:10.1089/end.2016.0895
6. Kuzgunbay B, Turunc T, Akin S, Ergenoglu P, Aribogan A, Ozkardes H. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy under general versus combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. J Endourol. 2009;23(11):1835-18388. doi:10.1089/end.2009.0261
7. Karacalar S, Bilen CY, Sarihasan B, Sarikaya S. Spinal-epidural anesthesia versus general anesthesia in the management of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy. J Endourol. 2009;23(10):1591-1597. doi: 10.1089/end.2009.0224
8. Nouralizadeh A, Ziaee SA, Hosseini Sharifi SH, et al. Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy under spinal versus general anesthesia: a randomized clinical trial. J Endourol. 2013;27(8):974-978. doi:10.1089/end.2013.0145
9. Singh V, Sinha RJ, Sankhwar SN, Malik A. A prospective randomized study comparing percutaneous nephrolithotomy under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia with percutaneous nephrolithotomy under general anesthesia. Urol Int. 2011;87(3):293-298. doi:10.1159/000329796
10. Rodgers A, Walker N, Schug S, et al. Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials. BMJ. 2000;321(7275):1493. doi:10. 1136/bmj.321.7275.1493
11. Barak M, Putilov V, Meretyk S, Halachmi S. ETView tracheoscopic ventilation tube for surveillance after tube position in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Br J Anaesth. 2010;104(4): 501-504. doi:10.1093/bja/aeq024
12. Mehrabi S, Karimzadeh Shirazi K. Results and complications of spinal anesthesia in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urol J. 2010;7(1):22-25.
13. Borzouei B, Mousavi-Bahar SH. Results of percutaneous nephrolithotomy under spinal anesthesia. Int J Med Health Biomed Bioeng Pharm Eng. 2012;6(5):117-120.
14. Bajwa SJ, Kaur J, Singh A. A comparative evaluation of epidural and general anaesthetic technique for renal surgeries: a randomised prospective study. Indian J Anaesth. 2014;58(4):410-415. doi:10.4103/ 0019-5049.138975
15. Dar MA, Malik SA, Dar YA, et al. Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy under epidural anesthesia versus general anesthesia: a randomized prospective study. Urol Ann. 2021;13(3):210-214. doi:10. 4103/UA.UA_82_20
16. Ranjan R, Malviya D, Misra S, Nath SS, Rastogi S. To compare the changes in hemodynamic parameters and blood loss during percutaneous nephrolithotomy-general anesthesia versus subarachnoid block. Anesth Essays Res. 2020;14(1):72-74. doi:10.4103/aer.AER_14_20
17. Sankar K, Anand K, Ramani S, Gayathri B. A randomized control trial to compare hemodynamic parameters of patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy under combined spinal-epidural and general anesthesia in a tertiary hospital. Local Reg Anesth. 2023;16:41-49. doi:10.2147/LRA.S410510
18. Tangpaitoon T, Nisoog C, Lojanapiwat B. Efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): a prospective and randomized study comparing regional epidural anesthesia with general anesthesia. Int Braz J Urol. 2012;38(4):504-511. doi:10.1590/s1677-55382012000400010
19. Cicek T, Gonulalan U, Dogan R, et al. Spinal anesthesia is an efficient and safe anesthetic method for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urology. 2014;83(1):50-55. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2013.08.064
20. Bhattarai R, Das C, Paudel B, Dangi SJ. Comparison of general versus spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized study. J Nobel Med Coll 2016;5(1):7-42. doi:10.3126/jonmc.v5i1.15763
21. Moawad HES, El Hefnawy AS. Spinal vs. general anesthesia for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a prospective randomized trial. Egypt J Anaesth. 2015;31(1):71-75. doi:10.1016/j.egja.2014.08.004
22. Liu X, Huang G, Zhong R, Hu S, Deng R. Comparison of percutaneous nephrolithotomy under regional versus general anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Urol Int. 2018;101(2):132-142. doi:10.1159/000491021
23. Ansari AS, Nizamani BK, Memon SR. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy under spinal anaesthesia. JOJ Uro Nephron. 2016;1(1):555552. doi:10. 19080/JOJUN.2016.1.555552
Article available in :
Volume 3, Issue 2, 2026
Page : 8-14
https://doi.org/10.51271/EAJAIC-0051
Article Information
Received : 10 Kas 2025
Accepted : 23 Ara 2025
Published : 16 May 2026
Corresponding Author :

Serkan Telli: Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Kütahya City Hospital, Kütahya, Turkiye

[email protected]
Citation : Telli S, Özenç E, Kepekçi AB. Comparative impact of general and epidural anesthesia on postoperative outcomes in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur J Anesthesiol Intens Care. 2026;3(2):34-40. doi:10.51271/EAJAIC-0051

Read: 115
Download : 69
Cited: 0
_Footer