An international delphi survey and consensus meeting to define the risk factors for ureteral stricture after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis.

PURPOSE: Iatrogenic ureteral strictures (US) after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis represent a significant healthcare concern. However, high-quality evidence on the risk factors associated with US is currently lacking. We aimed to develop a consensus statement addressing the definition, risk factors, and follow-up management of iatrogenic US after endoscopic treatment for urolithiasis. METHODS: Utilizing a modified Delphi method, a steering committee developed survey statements based on a systematic literature review. Then, a two-round online survey was submitted to 25 experts, offering voting options to assess agreement levels. A consensus panel meeting was held for unresolved statements. The predetermined consensus threshold was set at 70%. RESULTS: The steering committee formulated 73 statements. In the initial survey, consensus was reached on 56 (77%) statements. Following in-depth discussions and refinement of 17 (23%) statements in a consensus meeting, the second survey achieved consensus on 63 (86%) statements. This process underscored agreement on pivotal factors influencing US in endoscopic urolithiasis treatments. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive list of categorized risk factors for US following endoscopic urolithiasis treatments. The objectives include enhancing uniformity in research, minimizing redundancy in outcome assessments, and effectively addressing risk factors associated with US. These findings are crucial for designing future clinical trials and guiding endoscopic surgeons in mitigating the risk of US.

Ureteral stricture rate after endoscopic treatments for urolithiasis and related risk factors: systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: We aimed to accurately determine ureteral stricture (US) rates following urolithiasis treatments and their related risk factors. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA guidelines using databases from inception to November 2023. Studies were deemed eligible for analysis if they included ≥ 18 years old patients with urinary lithiasis (Patients) who were subjected to endoscopic treatment (Intervention) with ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), or shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) (Comparator) to assess the incidence of US (Outcome) in prospective and retrospective studies (Study design). RESULTS: A total of 43 studies were included. The pooled US rate was 1.3% post-SWL and 2.1% post-PCNL. The pooled rate of US post-URS was 1.9% but raised to 2.7% considering the last five years' studies and 4.9% if the stone was impacted. Moreover, the pooled US rate differed if follow-ups were under or over six months. Patients with proximal ureteral stone, preoperative hydronephrosis, intraoperative ureteral perforation, and impacted stones showed higher US risk post-endoscopic intervention with odds ratio of 1.6 (P = 0.05), 2.6 (P = 0.009), 7.1 (P < 0.001), and 7.47 (P = 0.003), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The overall US rate ranges from 0.3 to 4.9%, with an increasing trend in the last few years. It is influenced by type of treatment, stone location and impaction, preoperative hydronephrosis and intraoperative perforation. Future standardized reporting and prospective and more extended follow-up studies might contribute to a better understanding of US risks related to calculi treatment.

The new grasper-integrated single use flexible cystoscope for double J stent removal: evaluation of image quality, flow and flexibility.

BACKGROUND: A new single use digital flexible cystoscope (FC) Isiris α from Coloplast® with an incorporated grasper has been developed to perform double J stent removal. There is a lack of data regarding the comparison of image quality, flexibility and flow between classic cystoscopes and the new Isiris α. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five different FC were used to compare the image quality, the field of view, the loss of flow and the deflection loss. Two standardized grids, three stones of different composition and a ruler's image were filmed in four standardized different scenarios. These videos were shown to thirty subjects that had to evaluate them. Water outflow was measured in ml/sec in all devices with and without the grasper inside, instruments tip deflection was measured using a software. RESULTS: In the subjective analysis of the image quality Isiris α was the second FC best scored. At 3 cm of distance, the field view of Isiris α was the narrowest. Comparing the water flow in the different FCs, we observed a water flow decrease in all cystoscopes when the grasper was loaded in the working channel. Isiris α deflection and flow increase when the grasper is activated. CONCLUSION: In terms of quality of vision and water flow, the FC Isiris α is comparable to the other digital FC tested. Field of view is narrower. The results displayed a valid alternative to the standard procedure for DJ removal.