Routine ureteroscopy (URS) for stone disease is performed under a general anaesthesia. However, controversy exists on the role of loco-regional anaesthesia and the outcomes associated with it. Here we review the challenges, outcomes and complications of loco-regional anaesthesia for URS. A Cochrane style review was performed in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines to evaluate the outcomes of loco-reginal anaesthesia for URS in stone disease, including all English language articles from January 1980 and December 2019.
Twenty-one studies (1843 procedures) with a mean age of 46 years and a male : female ratio of 1.2 : 1 underwent URS under loco-regional anaesthesia. The mean stone size was 9 mm (range:4-21 mm) and except five papers, all other papers included stones in the ureter of which the majority were in the distal ureter. The conversion to general anaesthesia was needed in 2.7% patients (range 1-21%) across studies, with a stone free rate of 48-100%. The complication rate varied from 1.4 to 36%. Although the intraoperative complications included ureteric injury (n = 21) or perforation (n = 4), the postoperative complications included fever (n = 37), urinary tract infection (n = 20), haematuria (n = 4), urosepsis (n = 4) and others (n = 7).
The present systematic review shows that local anaesthetic URS is a potential alternative to general anaesthetic URS in carefully selected patients. Randomised controlled trials with subgroup analysis are required to further assess whether loco-regional anaesthesia URS is noninferior to general anaesthesia URS and might help determine if the former approach should become more widespread.
Current opinion in urology. 2020 Jul 09 [Epub ahead of print]
Matthew Schembri, Vineet Agarwal, Amelia Pietropaolo, Bhaskar Somani
University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK., The Guthrie Clinic, Sayre, Pennsylvania, USA.
This webpage is supported through an unrestricted educational grant from Bayer. Bayer is not involved in content development and the views expressed represent those of the patient and physician contributors.

