Advertisement

Anaesthesia for Supine and Modified Supine PNL

  • Adebanji A. B. AdeyojuEmail author
  • Neil Sutcliffe
Chapter

Abstract

Anaesthetists need to be aware of the difficulties and complications specific to PNL, a well-established endourological means of kidney stone removal. Although traditionally PNL has been performed in the semi-prone or prone position, more recently some centres have been successfully performing the procedure in a supine or modified supine position. This presents some significant advantages from the viewpoint of the anaesthetist, as well as a small number of disadvantages. However, many of the anaesthetist’s concerns regarding PNL are similar whatever the position used. Patient’s features and co-morbidities should be preliminarily evaluated in order to choose the best anaesthetic technique. Intraoperative management is also described, facing not only specific PNL complications such as blood loss or septic risk but also often overlooked issues including fluid balance and thermal control.

Keywords

Prone Position Regional Anaesthetic Technique Central Venous Pressure Monitoring Significant Heart Failure Sputum Retention 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Karacalar S, Bilen CY, Sarihasan B, Sarikaya S (2009) Spinal-epidural anesthesia versus general anesthesia in the management of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy. J Endourol 23:1591–1597PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kuzgunbay B, Turunc T, Akin S et al (2009) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy under general versus combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. J Endourol 23:1835–1838PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Singh V, Sinha RJ, Sankhwar SN, Malik A (2011) A prospective randomized study comparing percutaneous nephrolithotomy under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia with percutaneous nephrolithotomy under general anesthesia. Urol Int 87:293–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tangpaitoon T, Nisoog C, Lojanapiwat B (2012) Efficacy and safety of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): a prospective and randomized study comparing regional epidural anesthesia with general anesthesia. Int Braz J Urol 38:504–511PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen Y, Zhou Z, Sun W et al (2011) Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy under peritubal local infiltration anesthesia. World J Urol 29:773–777PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parikh GP, Shah VR, Modi MP, Chauchan NC (2011) The analgesic efficacy of peritubal infiltration of 0.25 % bupivacaine in percutaneous nephrolithotomy – a prospective randomized study. J Anasesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 27:481–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rozentsveig V, Neulander EZ, Roussabrov E et al (2007) Anesthetic considerations during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Clin Anesth 19:351–355PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vorrakitpokatorn P, Permtongchuchai K, Raksamani EO, Phettongkam A (2006) Perioperative complications and risk factors of percutaneous nephrolithotomy. J Med Assoc Thai 89:826–833PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Akhavan A, Gainsburg DM, Stock JA (2010) Complications associated with patient positioning in urologic surgery. Urology 76:1309–1316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderton J (1991) The prone position for the surgical patient: a historical review of the principles and hazards. Br J Anaesth 67:452–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edgecombe H, Carter K, Yarrow S (2008) Anaesthesia in the prone position. Br J Anaesth 100:165–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Borthakur B, Garg R (2011) Arrhythmias in prone position. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 27:420PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dube SK, Bharti SJ, Rath GP (2011) Frequent ventricular contractions under anaesthesia in prone position. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 27:142–143PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ho JD, Dawes DM, Moore JC et al (2011) Effect of position and weight force on inferior vena cava diameter – implications for arrest-related death. Forensic Sci Int 212:256–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leslie K, Wu CY, Bjorksten AR et al (2011) Cardiac output and propofol concentrations in prone surgical patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 39:868–874PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yu M, Leng Y, Bai Y et al (2011) The evaluation of the effect of body positioning on intra-abdominal pressure measurement and the effect of intra-abdominal pressure at different body positioning on organ function and prognosis in critically ill patients. J Crit Care 27:222.e1–222.e6Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Anusionwu IM, Wright EJ (2011) Compartment syndrome after positioning in lithotomy: what a urologist needs to know. BJU Int 108:477–481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Anderton J, Schady W, Markham D (1994) An unusual cause of postoperative brachial plexus palsy. J Anaesth 72:605–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schwartz D, Drummond D, Hahn M et al (2000) Prevention of positional brachial plexopathy during surgical correction of scoliosis. Spinal Disord 13:178–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Winfree C, Kline D (2005) Intraoperative positioning nerve injuries. Surg Neurol 63:5–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Addla SK, Rajpal S, Sutcliffe N, Adeyoju A (2008) A simple aid to improve patient positioning during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 90:433–434PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Agah M, Ghasemi M, Roodneshin F et al (2011) Prone position in percutaneous nephrolithotomy and postoperative visual loss. Urol J 8:191–198PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tempelhoff R (2008) An optic nerve at risk and a prolonged surgery in the prone position. Anaesthesiology 108:775–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Langmayr J, Ortler M, Obwegeser A, Felber S (1996) Quadriplegia after lumbar disc surgery. Spine 21:1932–1935PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barak M, Putilov V, Meretyk S, Halachmi S (2010) ETView tracheoscopic ventilation tube for surveillance after tube position in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Br J Anaesth 104:501–504PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Singh G, Manikandan S, Neema PK (2011) Endotracheal tube fixation in neurosurgical procedure operated in prone position. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 27:574–575PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wu SD, Yilmaz M, Tamul PC et al (2009) Awake endotracheal intubation and prone patient self-positioning: anesthetic and positioning considerations during percutaneous nephrolithotomy in obese patients. J Endourol 23:1599–1602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Atkinson CJ, Turney BW, Noble JG et al (2011) Supine vs prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an anaesthetist’s view. BJU Int 108:306–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Roberts S, Bolton DM, Stoller ML (1994) Hypothermia associated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urology 44:832–835PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Consultant Urological Surgeon, Department of UrologyStepping Hill Hospital NHS Foundation TrustStockportUK

Personalised recommendations