Turkish validation and reliability of the symptoms of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction Research Network Symptom Index-29 (LURN SI-29) questionnaire in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms.

AIMS: To evaluate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Symptoms of Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction Research Network Symptom Index-29 (LURN SI-29). METHODS: Patients with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) were included in a single-center study between January and April 2021. Patients' demographics, such as age, sex, and level of education, were recorded. The Turkish version of the LURN SI-29 and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) were administered to all patients, and the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) was additionally administered to female patients. Construct validity was evaluated by confirmatory factor analysis. Concurrent validity was evaluated with correlations to similar measures. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and split-half reliability analyses were used to establish the scale's reliability. RESULTS: A total of 295 participants, 35.3% females and 64.7% males, were included in the final analysis. The mean age was 56.4 ± 11.7 years. The median total LURN SI-29 scores were 38.0 (26-50) and 26.0 (18-43) for female and male patients, respectively. The LURN SI-29 scale showed a high correlation with IPSS and UDI-6 scales (r = .758, p < .001; r = .774, p < .001, respectively) in concurrent validity analysis. Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale and all subscales were greater than 0.70 for both female and male patients. CONCLUSIONS: This measurement tool can potentially be used to evaluate LUTS in Turkish women and men. Further studies should be performed to reveal the clinical usefulness of this scale.

Comparison of general anesthesia and combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for retrograde intrarenal surgery.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the applicability of the combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSEA) method in RIRS for the treatment of kidney stone disease and also to compare with general anesthesia (GA) in terms of their effects on early postoperative pain levels and their cost. METHODS: A hundred consecutive patients who were scheduled for RIRS were enrolled in this study and were prospectively evaluated according to the anesthesia methods. Patients were divided into 2 groups randomly: the GA (N.=50) and CSEA (N.=50) groups. Five patients were excluded due to patient incompatibility or inadequate anesthesia. The pain levels of patients in the Group 2 were recorded during the operation using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at minutes 1, 5, 10, 15, 30 and 60. Peak pain levels within the first 24 hours following the operation were recorded for both groups. RESULTS: Ninety five patients in the two groups were determined to be similar in terms of demographic characteristics. The mean VAS score at the postoperative 1st day was found as 1.20±0.9 for Group 1 and 0.82±1.3 for Group 2. No statistically significant differences were identified between the VAS-nram and VAS-ram groups (P=0.450). The total cost of anesthesia medications was similar between the both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, which produces favorable outcomes in the intraoperative and postoperative periods, will become an alternative to general anesthesia. Also, the costs associated with these two anesthesia methods were calculated, it was found that the total cost of anesthesia medications and materials per operation was similar both methods.