Retrolaminar Block Analgesia and Patient Comfort During Prone ESWL
NCT07177625 · Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING · Type: OBSERVATIONAL · Enrollment: 90
Last updated 2025-09-17
Summary
The purpose of this prospective, observational study is to evaluate the effect of retrolaminar block (RLB) on patient comfort and analgesic effectiveness during extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) procedures. The main questions the study aims to answer are:
Does retrolaminar block reduce pain intensity during ESWL?
Does retrolaminar block improve patient comfort during ESWL?
Participants will undergo the following interventions:
RLB Group: Retrolaminar block performed under ultrasound guidance prior to ESWL.
Sedation Group (S): Standard sedoanalgesia administered.
Control Group (C): No additional regional block or sedoanalgesia applied.
Participants will be monitored for pain levels, procedural duration, hemodynamic parameters, and the need for additional analgesics. The study aims to determine whether retrolaminar block can serve as a safe and effective analgesic method during ESWL procedures.
Conditions
- Urolithiasis
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
Retrolaminar block
Ultrasound-guided retrolaminar block performed prior to prone-position ESWL. This intervention is applied only to participants in the RLB Group. Patients will be monitored for pain intensity (VAS), vital signs, procedural duration, and any adverse events during and after the procedure. Rescue analgesia will be administered if clinically indicated.
- DRUG
-
Sedoanalgesia
Standard sedoanalgesia administered during prone-position ESWL. This intervention is applied only to participants in the Sedation Group. Pain intensity (VAS), vital signs, procedural duration, and any adverse events will be monitored. Rescue analgesia will be provided as needed.
- OTHER
-
No Intervention / None
No additional regional block or sedoanalgesia; standard monitoring only. This applies only to participants in the Control Group. Pain intensity (VAS), vital signs, procedural duration, and any adverse events will be monitored. Rescue analgesia will be provided if clinically indicated.
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Elazıg Fethi Sekin Sehir Hastanesi
lead OTHER
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2025-09-15
- Primary Completion
- 2025-11-15
- Completion
- 2025-11-30
Countries
- Turkey (Türkiye)
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Virtual Reality for Pain Control During Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy: a Prospective, Comparative, Randomized Study at a Single Institution
NCT05183269 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Ultra-mini PCNL and Micro PCNL
NCT02522689 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Music During ESWL for Half Treatment
NCT04338451 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Effect of Ureteral Access Sheath Use on Postoperative Pain Level in Patients Undergoing RIRS
NCT02501525 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Shockwave Lithotripsy (SWL) Under Selective, General Anesthesia.
NCT01008267 ·Status: UNKNOWN
-
Mini- Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for High Density Renal Stones
NCT04346134 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Strategies to Maximise Patient Comfort During ESWL
NCT03379922 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Evaluation of Different Treatment Modalities for Lower Pole and Renal Pelvis Stones
NCT02522676 ·Status: SUSPENDED ·Phase: NA
-
STRUCTURED PATIENT EDUCATION IN ESWL PATIENTS
NCT07341607 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Stress Ball Effects to Pain, Anxiety, Satisfaction and Treatment Continuity During ESWL
NCT06846723 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Urinary NGAL and KIM-1 After ESWL
NCT07341269 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Ultra Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy VS Stented Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Stone Management
NCT05697341 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Different Analgesia Drug Regimens for Pain Control During ESWL for Renal Stones
NCT02786446 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Fluoroscopy Activation Interval in SWL
NCT06689683 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of RIRS Versus PCNL Methods, According to Postoperative Pain and Analgesic Demand in 2 to 4 cm Renal Stones
NCT02430168 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Evaluation of Pain Before and After Removal of Non-obstructive Kidney Stones
NCT03657667 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Mini-PNL, RIRS, and ESWL for Treatment of Medium-Sized, High-Density, Non-Lower Pole, Renal Stones
NCT04856722 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
External Physical Vibration Lithecbole Versus Traditional Row of Stone After Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy(ESWL)
NCT02643134 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Narrow Versus Wide Focal Zones for Shock Wave Lithotripsy of Renal Calculi
NCT01226875 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Treatment of Large Pediatric Renal Pelvic Stone Burden More Than 2 cm
NCT05293613 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Safety of Thulium Fiber Laser Litothripsy in the Management of Large Renal Stones (>1000 mm³) and Factors Affecting Treatment Success
NCT07153978 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Pharmacokinetic, Safety and Efficacy Study of OMS201 in Subjects Undergoing Retrograde Ureteroscopic Removal of Upper Urinary Tract Stones
NCT00857090 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE1/PHASE2
-
Are the Stone Density and Location Useful Parameters for Small Kidney Stones?
NCT03503539 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Impact of Ureteral Stent and Sheaths Size on Post-Operative Pain
NCT06979583 ·Status: ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION ·Phase: NA
-
RIRS Versus ESWL for the Treatment of Renal Stones
NCT02645058 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA