Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach

Introduction Data concerning anaesthesia for endourology are rare, and options for it are numerous. Thus, identifying the optimal anaesthesia regimen remains challenging. With this study we aimed to provide the means for selecting optimal anaesthesia for endourology procedures. Material and methods...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kornel Skitek, Gregor A. Schittek, Jens Soukup
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Termedia Publishing House 2025-01-01
Series:Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.ait-journal.com/Process-optimisation-spinal-versus-general-anaesthesia-for-endourological-surgery,196606,0,2.html
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849321438826201088
author Kornel Skitek
Gregor A. Schittek
Jens Soukup
author_facet Kornel Skitek
Gregor A. Schittek
Jens Soukup
author_sort Kornel Skitek
collection DOAJ
description Introduction Data concerning anaesthesia for endourology are rare, and options for it are numerous. Thus, identifying the optimal anaesthesia regimen remains challenging. With this study we aimed to provide the means for selecting optimal anaesthesia for endourology procedures. Material and methods This was a randomised, open-label, controlled study conducted in a single tertiary hospital. Inclusion criteria: American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status/risk category I–III, and scheduled surgery time < 60 minutes. Exclusion criteria: contraindications or lack of consent for one of the anaesthesia types, intellectual disabilities, pregnancy, breastfeeding, and refusal to participate. The participants were divided into 3 groups: G1, spinal anaesthesia (SPA) with bupivacaine; G2, SPA with prilocaine; G3, total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with remifentanil and propofol. The primary outcome measure was time to ambulation, while the secondary outcome measures included perioperative hypotension. The results are presented as mean ± SD or median [IQR]. Results In total, 117 patients completed the study. The time to ambulation (minutes) was significantly different between all groups: 187.95 ± 49.82, 161.05 ± 46.28, and 129.14 ± 63.75 min, for G1, G2 and G3, respectively. The mean arterial pressure drop from baseline during the procedure was most pronounced in G3 (35% [30–44], P < 0.001) and lowest in G2 (18% [12–27], P < 0.001 vs. G3, NS vs. bupivacaine). Machine-learning models were trained and demonstrated satisfactory performance in predicting the time spent in recovery. Conclusions In the context of endourological surgery, the time required for ambulation was shortest when using TIVA, while SPA with hyperbaric prilocaine provides the closest approximation to optimal anaesthesia.
format Article
id doaj-art-8f4c4f8e6cae4e1fb0e8c275788a4c0a
institution Kabale University
issn 1642-5758
1731-2531
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Termedia Publishing House
record_format Article
series Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy
spelling doaj-art-8f4c4f8e6cae4e1fb0e8c275788a4c0a2025-08-20T03:49:45ZengTermedia Publishing HouseAnaesthesiology Intensive Therapy1642-57581731-25312025-01-0156528529410.5114/ait.2024.146716196606Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approachKornel Skitek0Gregor A. Schittek1Jens Soukup2Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Jena University Hospital, Jena, GermanyDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Medical University Graz, Graz, AustriaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine and Palliative Care Medicine, Medical University Lausitz – Carl Thiem, Cottbus, GermanyIntroduction Data concerning anaesthesia for endourology are rare, and options for it are numerous. Thus, identifying the optimal anaesthesia regimen remains challenging. With this study we aimed to provide the means for selecting optimal anaesthesia for endourology procedures. Material and methods This was a randomised, open-label, controlled study conducted in a single tertiary hospital. Inclusion criteria: American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status/risk category I–III, and scheduled surgery time < 60 minutes. Exclusion criteria: contraindications or lack of consent for one of the anaesthesia types, intellectual disabilities, pregnancy, breastfeeding, and refusal to participate. The participants were divided into 3 groups: G1, spinal anaesthesia (SPA) with bupivacaine; G2, SPA with prilocaine; G3, total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with remifentanil and propofol. The primary outcome measure was time to ambulation, while the secondary outcome measures included perioperative hypotension. The results are presented as mean ± SD or median [IQR]. Results In total, 117 patients completed the study. The time to ambulation (minutes) was significantly different between all groups: 187.95 ± 49.82, 161.05 ± 46.28, and 129.14 ± 63.75 min, for G1, G2 and G3, respectively. The mean arterial pressure drop from baseline during the procedure was most pronounced in G3 (35% [30–44], P < 0.001) and lowest in G2 (18% [12–27], P < 0.001 vs. G3, NS vs. bupivacaine). Machine-learning models were trained and demonstrated satisfactory performance in predicting the time spent in recovery. Conclusions In the context of endourological surgery, the time required for ambulation was shortest when using TIVA, while SPA with hyperbaric prilocaine provides the closest approximation to optimal anaesthesia.https://www.ait-journal.com/Process-optimisation-spinal-versus-general-anaesthesia-for-endourological-surgery,196606,0,2.htmlspinal anaesthesiamachine learningcost analysisendourological surgerytotal intravenous anaesthesiamachine learningcost analysis
spellingShingle Kornel Skitek
Gregor A. Schittek
Jens Soukup
Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach
Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy
spinal anaesthesia
machine learning
cost analysis
endourological surgery
total intravenous anaesthesia
machine learning
cost analysis
title Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach
title_full Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach
title_fullStr Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach
title_full_unstemmed Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach
title_short Process optimisation: spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery. A randomised, controlled trial and machine-learning approach
title_sort process optimisation spinal versus general anaesthesia for endourological surgery a randomised controlled trial and machine learning approach
topic spinal anaesthesia
machine learning
cost analysis
endourological surgery
total intravenous anaesthesia
machine learning
cost analysis
url https://www.ait-journal.com/Process-optimisation-spinal-versus-general-anaesthesia-for-endourological-surgery,196606,0,2.html
work_keys_str_mv AT kornelskitek processoptimisationspinalversusgeneralanaesthesiaforendourologicalsurgeryarandomisedcontrolledtrialandmachinelearningapproach
AT gregoraschittek processoptimisationspinalversusgeneralanaesthesiaforendourologicalsurgeryarandomisedcontrolledtrialandmachinelearningapproach
AT jenssoukup processoptimisationspinalversusgeneralanaesthesiaforendourologicalsurgeryarandomisedcontrolledtrialandmachinelearningapproach