|
STONE
DISEASE
Forced
Versus Minimal Intravenous Hydration in the Management of Acute Renal
Colic: A Randomized Trial
Springhart WP, Marguet CG, Sur RL, Norris RD, Delvecchio FC, Young MD,
Sprague P, Gerardo CA, Albala DM, Preminger GM
Comprehensive Kidney Stone Center, Duke University Medical Center, Durham,
North Carolina, USA
J Endourol. 2006; 20: 713-6
- Background
and Purpose:
The management of acute renal colic is a problem commonly encountered
by both urologists and emergency medicine physicians. The classic approach
to managing uncomplicated acute renal colic involves hydration, along
with imaging and pain control. Previous studies have suggested that
hydration has a significant impact on patient comfort, as well as spontaneous
stone passage. This study evaluated the effects of maintenance vs forced
hydration and its effect on the pain experienced from renal colic.
-
Patients and Methods:
Forty male and 18 female patients with a mean age of 41 years suspected
to have acute renal colic were identified in the emergency department.
After screening and informed consent, the patients were enrolled in
the study, and 43 patients were eventually available for analysis. Patients
received intravenous (IV) analgesia, imaging with a noncontrast CT scan
of abdomen and pelvis, and assignment to either forced IV hydration
with 2 L of normal saline over 2 hours (N = 20) or minimal IV hydration
at 20 mL of normal saline per hour (N = 23). A visual analog pain scale
was completed hourly for a total of 4 hours. Demographic information,
laboratory and imaging results, narcotic use in morphine equivalents
(ME), and pain scores were recorded and compared. Spontaneous stone
passage rates were also calculated by careful patient follow-up. Results
were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05.
-
Results:
Stone size was equivalent in the two treatment groups (p > 0.05).
There was no difference in the narcotic requirement in ME (p = 0.644)
between the two groups. Similarly, there was no difference in hourly
pain score or stone-passage rates between the groups (p > 0.05).
-
Conclusions:
Treatment of uncomplicated renal colic has traditionally included vigorous
intravenous hydration, as well as medications for the control of pain
and nausea. Our data suggest that maintenance intravenous fluids are
as efficacious as forced hydration with regard to patient pain perception
and narcotic use. Moreover, it appears the state of hydration has little
impact on stone passage.
-
Editorial Comment
This study demonstrates that in the emergency room (ER) setting, forced
hydration for acute renal colic does not impact pain or stone passage.
However, it is important to note that this study evaluates hydration
only in the acute ER setting. It is common practice for patients to
be instructed to force oral hydration after discharge from the emergency
room. Compliance with this recommendation and its impact on subsequent
stone passage was not evaluated in this study, and may be worthwhile
of further investigation. While the study relies on chart review and
self-reporting to document stone passage, other studies have suggested
that self-reporting of stone passage may be inaccurate in a significant
proportion of patients. The authors do not report the duration of follow-up
or time to stone passage, though the 30% spontaneous stone passage rate
is lower than one might expect in relation to the mean stone size. Location
of ureteral calculi was not reported, and could be a confounding variable
in the equation. In addition, the utility of forced hydration may depend
on the fluid status of the patient and the time from onset of pain to
presentation to the ER. As renal hemodynamics adapt to obstruction within
the first 24 hours, the impact of hydration may diminish with delayed
presentation. It may be useful to evaluate response to hydration based
on the presence of volume depletion (BUN/CR ratio) and the time to presentation
(< or > 24 hours from onset of pain).
Dr.
Manoj Monga
Professor, Department of Urology
University of Minnesota
Edina, Minnesota, USA |