Spinal anesthesia in children: most pediatric urologists are not on board.

OBJECTIVE: In 2016, the Food and Drug Administration issued a warning on general anesthetic medications used for lengthy procedures (>3 h) in children younger than 3 years. Spinal anesthesia can be a safe alternative to general anesthesia for many pediatric urology procedures. It can shorten total operating room (OR) time, provide excellent pain control, and allow parents to reunite with their child immediately after surgery. However, use of spinal anesthesia can also directly affect the operating surgeon (awake patient, time constraints of spinal, and prolonged preoperative time). Members of the Societies for Pediatric Urology (SPU) and European Society of Pediatric Urology (ESPU) were surveyed to get their opinions on the use of spinal anesthesia for routine pediatric urology procedures. It was hypothesized that half of pediatric urologists would favor spinal anesthesia and that SPU members would be more likely to favor spinal anesthesia than their European colleagues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A short survey with five clinical scenarios was created. Scenarios assessed physicians' recommendations regarding timing and the type of anesthesia (general or spinal) for common pediatric urology procedures: undescended testicle, inguinal hernia, hypospadias, phimosis, and phimosis with penoscrotal webbing. Surveys were emailed to members of the SPU and ESPU. Responses and demographic information were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 113 SPU members (46% response rate for members who opened the invitation) and 109 ESPU members. For all clinical scenarios, < 20% of pediatric urologists from the SPU and <25% from the ESPU favor doing any procedure with spinal anesthesia. The majority of respondents practice in children's hospitals with pediatric anesthesiologists, but roughly half of the responders (54% SPU and 43% ESPU) do not think their anesthesia colleagues would be comfortable performing spinal anesthesia. Furthermore, only 51% of SPU and 36% of ESPU members discuss the possible neurodevelopmental side-effects of anesthesia with parents; similarly, less than half of all respondents think their anesthesia colleagues address these potential side-effects when obtaining consent. The only significant difference between SPU and ESPU responses was that ESPU members tended to delay penile surgery more than SPU respondents. CONCLUSION: Whether general anesthesia has any effect on the developing brain of children undergoing routine pediatric urology procedures is unclear. Yet, few pediatric urologists, independent of their region of practice, prefer spinal to general anesthesia. Collaboration in the OR is the key to success, and it is important that pediatric urologists and pediatric anesthesiologists work together to balance the benefits and risks of general and spinal anesthesia.

Management of undescended testis may be improved with educational updates for referring providers.

OBJECTIVE: A large proportion of boys referred for undescended testis (UDT) is not managed optimally prior to the referral, with the majority seen at >1 year of age and many having unnecessary ultrasound (US). Our objective was to assess the magnitude of these problems in our area and to determine if unnecessary US decreased following interventions to educate referring providers (RPs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A chart review was done on new patients referred for UDT from January 2010 to June 2012. Data collection included age on date of pediatric urology office visit, whether or not RPs obtained an US, and whether the pediatric urology examination revealed an UDT or retractile testis. Several educational updates for RPs were provided and the proportion having US was tracked during the study period. RESULTS: Of 363 boys referred for UDT, only 17% (62) were seen at <1 year of age, and 62% (227) had retractile testis. US had been obtained in 24% (87/363). There was a statistically significant decrease in the proportion of patients having had an unnecessary US following the last update (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Delayed urology consultation and unnecessary US for UDT are common in our area. A brief focused educational update was effective in decreasing US in our area.