A comparative analysis of proximal obturator nerve block versus general anesthesia in transurethral resection of bladder tumor: Prospective exploratory study.

IF 1.3 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Gautam Shubhankar, Ankur Mittal, Vikas Kumar Panwar, Arup Kumar Mandal, Praveen Talawar
{"title":"A comparative analysis of proximal obturator nerve block versus general anesthesia in transurethral resection of bladder tumor: Prospective exploratory study.","authors":"Gautam Shubhankar, Ankur Mittal, Vikas Kumar Panwar, Arup Kumar Mandal, Praveen Talawar","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_254_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) harbors the risk of intraoperative obturator jerks in lateral wall tumors due to obturator nerve stimulation, resulting in bladder perforation. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided proximal obturator nerve block (PONB) with regional anesthesia (RA) versus general anesthesia (GA) during bipolar TURBT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective observational study enrolled 131 patients with lateral or posterolateral bladder tumors over 1.5 years. Patients were divided into two groups: Group I received PONB + RA (n = 63), while Group II received GA (n = 68). In Group I, 9 patients received unilateral (IA) and 54 bilateral PONB (IB). The primary objectives were to compare the incidence of obturator jerks and bladder perforations. Secondary objectives included comparing time taken for anesthesia, surgery, and associated complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Obturator jerks were observed in 60% of Group IA patients. Considering patient safety, the remaining 54 patients in Group I received bilateral PONB. Only 5% of patients in IB had obturator jerks. No obturator jerk was seen in the GA group. No patient had bladder perforation. Surgery and anesthesia times were 32 ± 6 min and 63 ± 13 min in Group IA, 37 ± 5 min and 65 ± 10 min in Group IB, and 28 ± 5 min and 64 ± 15 min in Group II, respectively, all statistically nonsignificant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bilateral PONB significantly reduced obturator jerks compared to unilateral PONB providing similar safety and efficacy as GA. It is a viable alternative for patients unfit for GA.</p>","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 2","pages":"111-116"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12021364/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/iju.iju_254_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) harbors the risk of intraoperative obturator jerks in lateral wall tumors due to obturator nerve stimulation, resulting in bladder perforation. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided proximal obturator nerve block (PONB) with regional anesthesia (RA) versus general anesthesia (GA) during bipolar TURBT.

Methods: This prospective observational study enrolled 131 patients with lateral or posterolateral bladder tumors over 1.5 years. Patients were divided into two groups: Group I received PONB + RA (n = 63), while Group II received GA (n = 68). In Group I, 9 patients received unilateral (IA) and 54 bilateral PONB (IB). The primary objectives were to compare the incidence of obturator jerks and bladder perforations. Secondary objectives included comparing time taken for anesthesia, surgery, and associated complications.

Results: Obturator jerks were observed in 60% of Group IA patients. Considering patient safety, the remaining 54 patients in Group I received bilateral PONB. Only 5% of patients in IB had obturator jerks. No obturator jerk was seen in the GA group. No patient had bladder perforation. Surgery and anesthesia times were 32 ± 6 min and 63 ± 13 min in Group IA, 37 ± 5 min and 65 ± 10 min in Group IB, and 28 ± 5 min and 64 ± 15 min in Group II, respectively, all statistically nonsignificant.

Conclusion: Bilateral PONB significantly reduced obturator jerks compared to unilateral PONB providing similar safety and efficacy as GA. It is a viable alternative for patients unfit for GA.

闭孔神经阻滞与全麻在经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术中的比较分析:前瞻性探索性研究。
导读:经尿道膀胱肿瘤切除术(TURBT)存在术中因闭孔神经刺激引起的闭孔痉挛,导致膀胱穿孔的风险。本研究旨在比较超声引导下区域麻醉(RA)与全身麻醉(GA)下近端闭孔神经阻滞(PONB)在双极TURBT手术中的安全性和有效性。方法:这项前瞻性观察研究纳入了131例膀胱外侧或后外侧肿瘤患者,时间超过1.5年。患者分为两组:I组接受PONB + RA治疗(n = 63), II组接受GA治疗(n = 68)。在I组,9例患者接受单侧(IA)和54例患者接受双侧PONB (IB)。主要目的是比较闭孔痉挛和膀胱穿孔的发生率。次要目的包括比较麻醉、手术和相关并发症所需的时间。结果:IA组60%的患者出现闭孔痉挛。考虑到患者的安全性,I组其余54例患者接受双侧PONB。只有5%的IB患者有闭孔痉挛。GA组未见闭孔抽搐。无患者膀胱穿孔。IA组手术麻醉时间分别为32±6 min和63±13 min, IB组分别为37±5 min和65±10 min, II组分别为28±5 min和64±15 min,差异均无统计学意义。结论:与单侧PONB相比,双侧PONB可显著减少闭孔痉挛,其安全性和有效性与GA相似。对于不适合GA的患者,这是一个可行的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Indian Journal of Urology
Indian Journal of Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
33 weeks
期刊介绍: Indian Journal of Urology-IJU (ISSN 0970-1591) is official publication of the Urological Society of India. The journal is published Quarterly. Bibliographic listings: The journal is indexed with Abstracts on Hygiene and Communicable Diseases, CAB Abstracts, Caspur, DOAJ, EBSCO Publishing’s Electronic Databases, Excerpta Medica / EMBASE, Expanded Academic ASAP, Genamics JournalSeek, Global Health, Google Scholar, Health & Wellness Research Center, Health Reference Center Academic, Hinari, Index Copernicus, IndMed, OpenJGate, PubMed, Pubmed Central, Scimago Journal Ranking, SCOLOAR, SCOPUS, SIIC databases, SNEMB, Tropical Diseases Bulletin, Ulrich’s International Periodical Directory
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信