Objectives. To evaluate the impact of general anesthesia (GA) versus spinal anesthesia (SpA) on intraoperative and postoperative outcome in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Methods. Seventy-two consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were randomized into group 1 (GA: 34 patients) or group 2 (L2-L3 or L3-L4 SpA: 38 patients) and underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy. The intraoperative and postoperative anesthetic and surgical variables were evaluated. Results. The mean +/- SEM operative time was not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.43). The overall blood loss was less in group 2 (P = 0.04). The mean +/- SEM postoperative time in the postoperative holding area was significantly shorter after SpA than after GA (P < 0.0001). The perioperative pain outcome in the postoperative holding area was significantly better for group 2 than for group 1 (P = 0.0017), but postoperative pain on day 1 was not significantly different between the two groups. The postoperative sedation score was significantly less in group 2 than in group 1 (P < 0.0001). On day 1, first flatus passed in a significantly larger number of patients in group 2 (P < 0.0001), and the overall gait was greater for group 2 patients (P = 0.02). Conclusions. These results suggest that SpA allows good muscle relaxation and a successful surgical outcome in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Moreover, SpA results in less intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative pain, and a faster postoperative recovery than GA. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc.

General versus spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy: Results of a prospective, randomized study

SALONIA , ANDREA;MONTORSI , FRANCESCO
2004

Abstract

Objectives. To evaluate the impact of general anesthesia (GA) versus spinal anesthesia (SpA) on intraoperative and postoperative outcome in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy. Methods. Seventy-two consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer were randomized into group 1 (GA: 34 patients) or group 2 (L2-L3 or L3-L4 SpA: 38 patients) and underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy. The intraoperative and postoperative anesthetic and surgical variables were evaluated. Results. The mean +/- SEM operative time was not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.43). The overall blood loss was less in group 2 (P = 0.04). The mean +/- SEM postoperative time in the postoperative holding area was significantly shorter after SpA than after GA (P < 0.0001). The perioperative pain outcome in the postoperative holding area was significantly better for group 2 than for group 1 (P = 0.0017), but postoperative pain on day 1 was not significantly different between the two groups. The postoperative sedation score was significantly less in group 2 than in group 1 (P < 0.0001). On day 1, first flatus passed in a significantly larger number of patients in group 2 (P < 0.0001), and the overall gait was greater for group 2 patients (P = 0.02). Conclusions. These results suggest that SpA allows good muscle relaxation and a successful surgical outcome in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Moreover, SpA results in less intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative pain, and a faster postoperative recovery than GA. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11768/707
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 46
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 32
social impact