Perspectives on technology: to use or to reuse, that is the endoscopic question-a systematic review of single-use endoscopes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes of single-use endoscopes with those of reusable endoscopes to better define their role within urology. METHODS: A systematic search of electronic databases was performed. All studies comparing the clinical outcomes of participants undergoing urological procedures with single-use endoscopes to those of participants treated with reusable endoscopes were included. Results are reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies in 3943 participants were identified. Six different single-use flexible ureteroscopes and two different single-use flexible cystoscopes were assessed. There were no differences in mean postoperative infection rates (4.0% vs 4.4%; P = 0.87) or overall complication rates (11.5% vs 11.9%; P = 0.88) between single-use and reusable endoscopes. For patients undergoing flexible ureteroscopy there were no differences in operating time (mean difference -0.05 min; P = 0.96), length of hospital stay (LOS; mean difference 0.06 days; P = 0.18) or stone-free rate (SFR; 74% vs 74.3%; P = 0.54) between the single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope groups. CONCLUSION: This study is the largest to compare the clinical outcomes of single-use endoscopes to those of reusable endoscopes within urology, and demonstrated no difference in LOS, complication rate or SFR, with a shorter operating time associated with single-use flexible cystoscope use. It also highlights that the cost efficiency and environmental impact of single-use endoscopes is largely dependent on the caseload and reprocessing facilities available within a given institution. Urologists can therefore feel confident that whether they choose to 'use' or to 'reuse' based on the financial and environmental implications, they can do so without negatively impacting patient outcomes.

Advancements in stone classification: unveiling the beauty of urolithiasis.

PURPOSE: Urolithiasis has become increasingly prevalent, leading to higher disability-adjusted life years and deaths. Various stone classification systems have been developed to enhance the understanding of lithogenesis, aid urologists in treatment decisions, and predict recurrence risk. The aim of this manuscript is to provide an overview of different stone classification criteria. METHODS: Two authors conducted a review of literature on studies relating to the classification of urolithiasis. A narrative synthesis for analysis of the studies was used. RESULTS: Stones can be categorized based on anatomical position, size, medical imaging features, risk of recurrence, etiology, composition, and morphoconstitutional analysis. The first three mentioned offer a straightforward approach to stone classification, directly influencing treatment recommendations. With the routine use of CT imaging before treatment, precise details like anatomical location, stone dimensions, and Hounsfield Units can be easily determined, aiding treatment planning. In contrast, classifying stones based on risk of recurrence and etiology is more complex due to dependencies on multiple variables, including stone composition and morphology. A classification system based on morphoconstitutional analysis, which combines morphological stone appearance and chemical composition, has demonstrated its value. It allows for the rapid identification of crystalline phase principles, the detection of crystalline conversion processes, the determination of etiopathogenesis, the recognition of lithogenic processes, the assessment of crystal formation speed, related recurrence rates, and guidance for selecting appropriate treatment modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing that no single classification system can comprehensively cover all aspects, the integration of all classification approaches is essential for tailoring urolithiasis patient-specific management.

Follow-up of urolithiasis patients after treatment: an algorithm from the EAU Urolithiasis Panel.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a follow-up algorithm for urinary stone patients after definitive treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The panel performed a systematic review on follow-up of urinary stone patients after treatment (PROSPERO: CRD42020205739). Given the lack of comparative studies we critically evaluated the literature and reached a consensus on the follow-up scheme. RESULTS: A total of 76 studies were included in the analysis, including 17 RCTs. In the stone-free general population group, 71-100% of patients are stone-free at 12 months while 29-94% remain stone-free at 36 months. We propose counselling these patients on imaging versus discharge after the first year. The stone-free rate in high-risk patients not receiving targeted medical therapy is < 40% at 36 months, a fact that supports imaging, metabolic, and treatment monitoring follow-up once a year. Patients with residual fragments ≤ 4 mm have a spontaneous expulsion rate of 18-47% and a growth rate of 10-41% at 12 months, supporting annual imaging follow-up. Patients with residual fragments > 4 mm should be considered for surgical re-intervention based on the low spontaneous expulsion rate (13% at 1 year) and high risk of recurrence. Plain film KUB and/or kidney ultrasonography based on clinicians' preference and stone characteristics is the preferred imaging follow-up. Computed tomography should be considered if patient is symptomatic or intervention is planned. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence from the systematic review we propose, for the first time, a follow-up algorithm for patients after surgical stone treatment balancing the risks of stone recurrence against the burden of radiation from imaging studies.

Radiation exposure of urologists during endourological procedures: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Ionizing radiation is used daily during endourological procedures. Despite the dangers of both deterministic and stochastic effects of radiation, there is a lack of knowledge and awareness among urologists. This study reviewed the literature to identify the radiation exposure (RE) of urologists during endourological procedures. METHODS: A literature search of the Medline, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases was conducted to collect articles related to the radiation dose to urologists during endourological procedures. A total of 1966 articles were screened. 21 publications met the inclusion criteria using the PRIMA standards. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included, of which 14 were prospective. There was a large variation in the mean RE to the urologist between studies. PCNL had the highest RE to the urologist, especially in the prone position. RE to the eyes and hands was highest in prone PCNL, compared to supine PCNL. Wearing a thyroid shield and lead apron resulted in a reduction of RE ranging between 94.1 and 100%. Educational courses about the possible dangers of radiation decreased RE and increased awareness among endourologists. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first systematic review in the literature analyzing RE to urologists over a time period of more than four decades. Wearing protective garments such as lead glasses, a thyroid shield, and a lead apron are essential to protect the urologist from radiation. Educational courses on radiation should be encouraged to further reduce RE and increase awareness on the harmful effects of radiation, as the awareness of endourologists is currently very low.

Trends in the use of radiation protection and radiation exposure of European endourologists: a prospective trial from the EULIS-YAU Endourology Group.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the radiation exposure for the urology staff during endourology, our aim was to evaluate the trends of radiation protection in the operation room by endourologists from European centers and to estimate their annual radiation. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter study involving experienced endourologists from different European centers to evaluate whether the protection and threshold doses recommended by the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) were being followed. A 36-question survey was completed on the use of fluoroscopy and radiation protection. Annual prospective data from chest, extremities, and eye dosimeters were collected during a 4-year period (2017-2020). RESULTS: Ten endourologists participated. Most surgeons use lead aprons and thyroid shield (9/10 and 10/10), while leaded gloves and caps are rarely used (2/10 both). Six out of ten surgeons wear leaded glasses. There is widespread use of personal chest dosimeters under the apron (9/10), and only 5/10 use a wrist or ring dosimeter and 4 use an eye dosimeter. Two endourologists use the ALARA protocol. The use of ultrasound and fluoroscopy during PCNL puncture was reported by 8 surgeons. The mean number of PCNL and URS per year was 30.9 (SD 19.9) and 147 (SD 151.9). The mean chest radiation was 1.35 mSv per year and 0.007 mSv per procedure. Mean radiation exposure per year in the eyes and extremities was 1.63 and 11.5 mSv. CONCLUSIONS: Endourologists did not exceed the threshold doses for radiation exposure to the chest, extremities and lens. Furthermore, the ALARA protocol manages to reduce radiation exposure.

Urologists' opinion on treating asymptomatic stones: Would we treat ourselves as we treat our patients? Survey from European Association of Urology, Young Academic Urologists, Endourology and Urolithiasis working party.

Background/aim: Management of asymptomatic kidney stones is an ongoing debate with follow-up and treatment guidelines based on low-level evidence. Our aim was to evaluate current management of asymptomatic urinary stones. Materials and methods: A 70-question survey was designed in collaboration with European Association of Urology, Young Academic Urologists, Section of Uro-Technology and Section of Urolithiasis groups and distributed. Responders filled out hypothetical scenarios from 2 perspectives, either as treating physicians, or as patients themselves. Results: A total of 212 (40.01%) responses were obtained. Median responder age was 39 years. 75% of responders were interested in "urolithiasis". 82.5% had never experienced a renal colic, 89.6% had never undergone urolithiasis treatment.Overall, as the kidney stone scenarios got more complicated, the invasiveness of the treatment preference increased. As "the physician", responders preferred the conservative option in all situations more than they would choose as "the patient". For ureteral stones, conservative approach was most preferred for small stones and ureteroscopy became more preferred as the stone size increased.For smaller kidney stones, the most preferred follow-up schedule was 4-6 monthly, whereas for larger and complicated stones it was 0-3 monthly from both perspectives respectively. For all ureteral stone scenarios, 0-4 weekly follow-up was mostly preferred.Interestingly, having had a renal colic was an independent predictor of an interventional approach, whereas having had an intervention was an independent predictor of a conservative approach. Conclusion: Current treatment and follow-up patterns of asymptomatic urinary stones are in agreement with international guidelines on symptomatic stones.In most of the urolithiasis situations urologists chose a conservative approach for their patients compared to what they would prefer for themselves. Conversely, urologists, in the scenarios as "the patient", would like to have a more frequent follow-up schedule for their stones compared to how they would follow-up their patients.

Outcomes of Flexible Ureteroscopy vs Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones in Pediatric Patients: A European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine which treatment between flexible ureteroscopy and shock wave lithotripsy has a better stone-free rate in pediatric patients (<18 years) with renal or proximal ureteric stones (<2 cm). Subanalysis for all outcomes for randomized controlled trials only. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane database, we identified studies (randomized clinical trials and prospective comparative nonrandomized studies) published until August 2022 reporting surgical outcomes of pediatrics patients undergoing flexible ureteroscopy and shock wave lithotripsy with renal or proximal ureteric stones <2 cm (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022378790). Only randomized controlled trials were considered for meta-analysis. Stone-free rate, operative time, and complications were analyzed. Analysis was performed in R. RESULTS: A total of 6 studies identified, of which 3 were randomized clinical trials and 4 had data on renal stones. A total of 669 patients were analyzed. Mean age ranged from 4.4 to 12.4 years. The shock wave lithotripsy group presented a range of stone-free rate between 21 and 90% while the flexible ureteroscopy group presented a range of stone-free rates between 37% and 97%. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials only (n=302) demonstrated significantly higher stone-free rate in flexible ureteroscopy vs shock wave lithotripsy (RR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.04-1.33, P = 0.01), operative time (mean difference = +16.4 minutes, 95% CI: 7.3-25.5, P < 0.01) and hospital stay (mean difference = +0.25 days, 95% CI: 0.14-0.36, P < 0.001). But no difference in fluoroscopy exposure time (mean difference = -21.0 seconds, 95% CI: -42.6 to 0.56, P = 0.07), Clavien I-II (RR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.71-2.12, P = 0.45) or Clavien III-V complications (RR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.32-3.42, P = 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Flexible ureteroscopy has a significantly higher stone-free rate than shock wave lithotripsy, with no difference in complication rate or fluoroscopy exposure time, and significantly higher operative times and hospital stay. However, the current evidence base for this is weak and further randomized trials are needed.

Upper urinary tract pressures in endourology: a systematic review of range, variables and implications.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the literature to ascertain the upper tract pressures generated during endourology, the relevant influencing variables and clinical implications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the MEDLINE, Scopus and Cochrane databases was performed by two authors independently (S.C., N.D.). Studies reporting ureteric or intrarenal pressures (IRP) during semi-rigid ureteroscopy (URS)/flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS)/percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL)/miniaturized PCNL (mPCNL) in the period 1950-2021 were identified. Both in vitro and in vivo studies were considered for inclusion. Findings were independently screened for eligibility based on content, with disagreements resolved by author consensus. Data were assessed for bias and compiled based on predefined variables. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Mean IRP appeared to frequently exceed a previously proposed threshold of 40 cmH2 O. Semi-rigid URS with low-pressure irrigation (gravity <1 m) resulted in a wide mean IRP range (lowest reported 6.9 cmH2 O, highest mean 149.5 ± 6.2 cmH2 O; animal models). The lowest mean observed with fURS without a ureteric access sheath (UAS) was 47.6 ± 4.1 cmH2 O, with the maximum peak IRP being 557.4 cmH2 O (in vivo human data). UAS placement significantly reduced IRP during fURS, but did not guarantee pressure control with hand-operated pump/syringe irrigation. Miniaturization of PCNL sheaths was associated with increased IRP; however, a wide mean human IRP range has been recorded with both mPCNL (lowest -6.8 ± 2.2 cmH2 O [suction sheath]; highest 41.2 ± 5.3 cmH2 O) and standard PCNL (lowest 6.5 cmH2 O; highest 41.2 cmH2 O). Use of continuous suction in mPCNL results in greater control of mean IRP, although short pressure peaks >40 cmH2 O are not entirely prevented. Definitive conclusions are limited by heterogeneity in study design and results. Postoperative pain and pyrexia may be correlated with increased IRP, however, few in vivo studies correlate clinical outcome with measured IRP. CONCLUSIONS: Intrarenal pressure generated during upper tract endoscopy often exceeds 40 cmH2 O. IRP is multifactorial in origin, with contributory variables discussed. Larger prospective human in vivo studies are required to further our understanding of IRP thresholds and clinical sequelae.

Outcomes of alpha-blockers as medical expulsive therapy following shockwave lithotripsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine stone-free rate following shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) with/without alpha-blockers as well as complication rates (individual and classified using the Clavien-Dindo system). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials that included more than 20 patients (age > 18 years) and examined the use of alpha-blockers after SWL. Meta-analysis was performed using 'metafor' in R. We report risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). The PROSPERO ID for the trial was: CRD42021248108. RESULTS: We assessed 158 full-text articles and included a total of 21 studies in our review. There were 1445 patients receiving alpha-blockers and 1478 control patients. Those receiving alpha-blockers were significantly more likely to be stone-free (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.07-1.16; P < 0.001). This effect was robust to 'trim-and-fill' adjustment. In those taking alpha-blockers there was a significant reduction in Clavien III-V complications and, on trim-and-fill adjustment, a significant reduction in Clavien I-II complications. There were also significant reduction in rates of steinstrasse, pain and requirement for auxiliary procedures. There was no significant difference in retreatment rates. These effects were robust to trim-and-fill adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: There is a modest increase in stone-free rates in those receiving alpha-blockers following SWL, with a reciprocal modest risk reduction for steinstrasse, pain and auxiliary procedures. However, alpha-blockers do not reduce the risk of requiring retreatment.

Does pre-stenting influence outcomes of shockwave lithotripsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether preoperative use of JJ stents in patients undergoing shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) impacts on stone clearance and the rate of postoperative complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We screened multiple databases from inception to January 2021, using the relevant search terms for SWL in patients with a preoperative stent. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials of ≥20 patients aged >18 years who had had SWL with a JJ stent. This review has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number CRD42023443195). Statistical analysis was performed using 'meta' in R. RESULTS: There were seven eligible studies (403 patients receiving JJ stents and 394 controls). There was no significant difference in the stone-free rate (SFR) following SWL with a JJ stent compared to SWL alone. When considering the complication rates, there was a significantly reduced risk of steinstrasse in patients with a JJ stent. However, there was no significant difference in the risk of other complications including pain, fever, and haematuria, and no significant difference in the likelihood of requiring auxiliary procedures or re-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There was a reduced risk of steinstrasse in patients undergoing SWL with a JJ stent compared to SWL alone. However, there was no significant difference in the risk of other postoperative complications. Use of a JJ stent had no effect on the efficacy of SWL, with no significant difference in the SFR.

In vivo ureteroscopic intrarenal pressures and clinical outcomes: a multi-institutional analysis of 120 consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pressure range generated in the human renal collecting system during ureteroscopy (URS), in a large patient sample, and to investigate a relationship between intrarenal pressure (IRP) and outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective multi-institutional study was conducted, with ethics board approval; February 2022-March 2023. Recruitment was of 120 consecutive consenting adult patients undergoing semi-rigid URS and/or flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS) for urolithiasis or diagnostic purposes. Retrograde, fluoroscopy-guided insertion of a 0.036-cm (0.014″) pressure guidewire (COMET™ II, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) to the renal pelvis was performed. Baseline and continuous ureteroscopic IRP was recorded, alongside relevant operative variables. A 30-day follow-up was completed. Descriptive statistics were applied to IRP traces, with mean (sd) and maximum values and variance reported. Relationships between IRP and technical variables, and IRP and clinical outcome were interrogated using the chi-square test and independent samples t-test. RESULTS: A total of 430 pressure traces were analysed from 120 patient episodes. The mean (sd) baseline IRP was 16.45 (5.99) mmHg and the intraoperative IRP varied by technique. The mean (sd) IRP during semi-rigid URS with gravity irrigation was 34.93 (11.66) mmHg. FURS resulted in variable IRP values: from a mean (sd) of 26.78 (5.84) mmHg (gravity irrigation; 12/14-F ureteric access sheath [UAS]) to 87.27 (66.85) mmHg (200 mmHg pressurised-bag irrigation; 11/13-F UAS). The highest single pressure peak was 334.2 mmHg, during retrograde pyelography. Six patients (5%) developed postoperative urosepsis; these patients had significantly higher IRPs during FURS (mean [sd] 81.7 [49.52] mmHg) than controls (38.53 [22.6] mmHg; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A dynamic IRP profile is observed during human in vivo URS, with IRP frequently exceeding expected thresholds. A relationship appears to exist between elevated IRP and postoperative urosepsis.

The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP-tool): a Delphi consensus project on standardised evaluation of flexible ureterorenoscopes.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a standardised tool to evaluate flexible ureterorenoscopes (fURS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A three-stage consensus building approach based on the modified Delphi technique was performed under guidance of a steering group. First, scope- and user-related parameters used to evaluate fURS were identified through a systematic scoping review. Then, the main categories and subcategories were defined, and the expert panel was selected. Finally, a two-step modified Delphi consensus project was conducted to firstly obtain consensus on the relevance and exact definition of each (sub)category necessary to evaluate fURS, and secondly on the evaluation method (setting, used tools and unit of outcome) of those (sub)categories. Consensus was reached at a predefined threshold of 80% high agreement. RESULTS: The panel consisted of 30 experts in the field of endourology. The first step of the modified Delphi consensus project consisted of two questionnaires with a response rate of 97% (n = 29) for both. Consensus was reached for the relevance and definition of six main categories and 12 subcategories. The second step consisted of three questionnaires (response rate of 90%, 97% and 100%, respectively). Consensus was reached on the method of measurement for all (sub)categories. CONCLUSION: This modified Delphi consensus project reached consensus on a standardised grading tool for the evaluation of fURS - The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP) tool. This is a first step in creating uniformity in this field of research to facilitate future comparison of outcomes of the functionality and handling of fURS.

Complication rate after pediatric shock wave lithotripsy according to Clavien-Dindo grading system: results from a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature.

PURPOSE: Shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) is a minimally invasive technique utilized for renal and ureteric stones in children. Despite being considered safe, certain complications have been recorded. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to provide a pooled analysis of Clavien-Dindo graded complications after SWL in children. METHODS: MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, were screened from inception to 12/02/2022 by two authors independently. Only randomized controlled trials providing Clavien-Dindo classification or relevant clinical information were considered eligible. Overall complications were calculated using the aggregate number of each complication divided by the total number of patients in studies with data. RESULTS: Pooled analysis revealed that from children treated with SWL, 27.7% [95% CI 13.1-49.4] suffered Clavien I complications, 4.9% [95% CI 3.1-7.6] Clavien II complications, 2.7% [95% CI 1.6-4.7] Clavien III complications, 2.3% [95% CI 1.3-4] Clavien IV complications, while no Clavien V complications were recorded. In total, 28.1% [95% CI 15.6-45.3] of children suffered minor complications (Clavien-Dindo I-II), while 3% [95% CI 1.8-5] major complications (Clavien-Dindo III-V). Pooled analysis revealed that 10.7% [95% CI 3.2-30.1] of patients suffered macroscopic hematuria, 7.3% [95% CI 2.1-22.7] pain, 5.5% [95% CI 3.3-9] steinstrasse, 5.3% [95% CI 3-9.3] fever, 2.2% [95% CI 0.8-5.6] sepsis, 1.1% [95% CI 0.3-3.7] urinoma, 1% [95% CI 0.4-2.7] symptomatic hematoma and 1% [95% CI 0.3-2.7] asymptomatic hematoma. Need for re-treatment was 42.6% [95% CI 31.4-54.7] and need for auxiliary procedures was 11.8% [95% CI 8.5-16.1]. CONCLUSION: SWL is an irreplaceable tool for treating urolithiasis in children. Although a minimally invasive technique, parents and children should be adequately informed about the risk of minor/major complications.

How do endoscopic bladder tumor resection techniques affect pathology practice? EAU Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Uropathology (ESUP) survey.

PURPOSE: We aimed to examine how different endoscopic bladder tumor resection techniques affect pathologists' clinical practice patterns. METHODS: An online survey including 28 questions clustered in four main sections was prepared by the ESUT ERBT Working Group and released to the pathologists working in the institutions of experts of the ESUT Board and the working groups and experts in the uropathology working group. A descriptive analysis was performed using the collected data. RESULTS: Sixty-eight pathologists from 23 countries responded to the survey. 37.3% of the participants stated that they always report the T1 sub-staging. Of those who gave sub-staging, 61.3% used T1a, b. 85.2% think that en bloc samples provide spatial orientation faster than piecemeal samples, and 60% think en bloc samples are timesaving during an inspection. 55.7% stated that whether the tissue sample is en bloc or piecemeal is essential. 57.4% think en bloc sample reduces turnaround time and is cost-effective for 44.1%. A large number of pathologists find that the pathology examination of piecemeal samples has a longer learning curve. CONCLUSION: The survey shows that pathologists think that they can diagnose faster, accurately, and cost-effectively with ERBT samples, but they do not often encounter them in practice. Moreover, en bloc samples may be a better choice in pathology resident training. Evidence from real-life observational pathology practice and clinical research can reveal the current situation more clearly and increase awareness on proper treatment in endoscopic management of bladder tumors.

Assessment of single-probe dual-energy lithotripters in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical and clinical studies.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of single-probe dual-energy (SPDE) lithotripters in patients undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Embase databases until July 2022 for any preclinical or clinical studies, exploring the safety and efficacy of different SPDE lithotripters in patients undergoing PCNL. We performed a meta-analysis to compare stone-free rate, bleeding, or other complications and mean operative time between SPDE lithotripters and other lithotripters (PROSPERO: CRD42021285631). RESULTS: We included 16 studies (six preclinical, seven observational and three randomized with 625 participants) in the systematic review and four in the meta-analysis. Preclinical studies suggest that SPDE lithotripters are safe and effective for the management of renal stones. Among clinical studies, four studies assessed Trilogy with no comparative arm, two compared Trilogy or ShockPulse with a dual-probe dual-energy lithotripter, two compared Trilogy with a laser, one compared ShockPulse with a pneumatic lithotripter, and one directly compared Trilogy with ShockPulse. Comparing SPDE lithotripters to other lithotripters, no significant differences were demonstrated in stone free rate (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.53-2.38, I2 = 0%), postoperative blood transfusion (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.34-5.19, I2 = 0%), embolization (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.02-12.06), operative time (WMD: 2.82 min, 95% CI -7.31-12.95, I2 = 78%) and postoperative complications based on the Clavien-Dindo classification. CONCLUSIONS: SPDE lithotripters represent a promising treatment modality for patients requiring PCNL. Despite the initial encouraging findings of preclinical and isolated clinical studies, it seems that Trilogy or ShockPulse provide similar efficiency compared to older generation devices.

The technological future of percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a Young Academic Urologists Endourology and Urolithiasis Working Group update.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: With advancements in surgical technology along with procedural techniques, this article throws light on the latest developments and applications of artificial intelligence (AI), extended reality, 3D (three-dimensional) printing and robotics in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). RECENT FINDINGS: This review highlights the applications of AI in PCNL over the past 2 years. Mostly studies have been reported on development of machine learning (ML) based predicting models and identification of stone composition using deep learning convolutional neural network (DL-CNN). But owing to the complexity of the models and lack of generalizability, it is still not incorporated in the routine clinical practice. Extended reality based simulation and training models have enabled trainees to enhance their skills and shorten the learning curve. Similar advantages have been reported with the use of 3D printed models when used to train young and novice endourologists to improve their skills in percutaneous access (PCA). Applications of robotics in PCNL look promising but are still in nascent stages. SUMMARY: Future research on PCNL should focus more on generalizability and adaptability of technological advancements in terms of training and improvement of patient outcomes.

Single-Use Ureteroscopy and Environmental Footprint: Review of Current Evidence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Ureteroscopy is a well-established treatment modality for kidney and ureteric calculi in addition to playing a key role in upper tract cancer diagnostics. Traditional reusable flexible ureteroscopes are technologically advanced and expensive pieces of equipment that require repeat sterilisation and periodical repair. These issues have led to the development of single-use flexible ureteroscopes that are disposed of after each case. Whilst this may be advantageous in many respects, the environmental impact of such technology is yet to be fully determined. The aim of this review is to therefore identify and summarise the available literature concerning the environmental footprint of single-use ureteroscopy. RECENT FINDINGS: To identify the latest research on this topic, a systematic search of world literature was conducted using the Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO databases. PRISMA guidelines were followed and articles were assessed by all authors and relevant study results were included in a narrative format. Only one relevant article was identified and included. This study found that a single-use flexible ureteroscope (LithoVueTM by Boston Scientific) generated an equivalent amount of carbon dioxide per case to a contemporary reusable flexible ureteroscope. Literature concerning the environmental footprint of single-use ureteroscopy is worryingly lacking. No conclusions can be definitively drawn from a single study and further research is imperative given the global climate crisis and the significant contribution that healthcare services have to the environmental problem.

"Glycogen deposition in the detrusor muscle of patients with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) due to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH); correlation with the urodynamic parameters.''.

PURPOSE: A prospective case-control study was conducted to evaluate glycogen deposition within the detrusor and its correlation with the urodynamic findings in patients with bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) due to benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from 50 patients with BPH (Study Group) and 20 controls (Control Group) were analyzed. BOO was confirmed by pressure-flow studies. The main outcome was glycogen deposition within the bladder wall. Bladder tissue biopsies were obtained from all patients, and histological assessment of the detrusor glycogen content was performed using Periodate Acid Schiff's (PAS) stain. The obtained glycogen score ranged from 0 (no staining of glycogen granules) to 3 (staining of glycogen granules within the detrusor adjacent to the urothelium). RESULTS: Fifty patients and 20 controls were included. Increased glycogen deposition was observed in 37 (74%) and 2 (10%) patients in the Study and Control Group, respectively (p < 0.01, OR 25.6, 95% CI 5.2-125.8). In the subgroup analysis, no statistically significant difference was found between glycogen deposition score and IPSS, maximum detrusor pressure at maximum flow (PdetQmax) and duration of LUTS. In multivariate logistic regression, history of retention was the only variable which could predict high glycogen deposition (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate increased detrusor glycogen deposition in patients with BOO due to BPH, but the amount of deposition did not seem to correlate with symptom severity and duration or urodynamic findings.

Using machine learning techniques to predict antimicrobial resistance in stone disease patients.

PURPOSE: Artificial intelligence is part of our daily life and machine learning techniques offer possibilities unknown until now in medicine. This study aims to offer an evaluation of the performance of machine learning (ML) techniques, for predicting bacterial resistance in a urology department. METHODS: Data were retrieved from laboratory information system (LIS) concerning 239 patients with urolithiasis hospitalized in the urology department of a tertiary hospital over a 1-year period (2019): age, gender, Gram stain (positive, negative), bacterial species, sample type, antibiotics and antimicrobial susceptibility. In our experiments, we compared several classifiers following a tenfold cross-validation approach on 2 different versions of our dataset; the first contained only information of Gram stain, while the second had knowledge of bacterial species. RESULTS: The best results in the balanced dataset containing Gram stain, achieve a weighted average receiver operator curve (ROC) area of 0.768 and F-measure of 0.708, using a multinomial logistic regression model with a ridge estimator. The corresponding results of the balanced dataset, that contained bacterial species, achieve a weighted average ROC area of 0.874 and F-measure of 0.783, with a bagging classifier. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial intelligence technology can be used for making predictions on antibiotic resistance patterns when knowing Gram staining with an accuracy of 77% and nearly 87% when identifying specific microorganisms. This knowledge can aid urologists prescribing the appropriate antibiotic 24-48 h before test results are known.

Emergency upper urinary tract decompression: double-J stent or nephrostomy? A European YAU/ESUT/EULIS/BSIR survey among urologists and radiologists.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the decompression of the pelvicalyceal system between urologists and radiologists. METHODS: A survey was distributed to urologists and to radiologists comparing double-J stent (DJS), percutaneous nephrostomy (PN) and primary ureteroscopy (URS) for three clinical scenarios (1-febrile hydronephrosis; 2-obstruction and persistent pain; 3-obstruction and anuria) before and after reading literature The survey included perception on radiation dose, cost and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: Response rate was 40% (366/915). 93% of radiologists believe that DJS offers a better QOL compared to 70.6% of urologists (p = 0.006). 28.4% of urologists consider PN to be more expensive compared to 8.9% of radiologists (p = 0.006). 75% of radiologists believe that radiation exposure is higher with DJS as opposed to 33.9% of urologists. There was not a difference in the decompression preference in the first scenario. After reading the literature, 28.6% of radiologists changed their opinion compared to 5.2% of urologists (p < 0.001). The change favored DJS. In the second scenario, responders preferred equally DJS and they did not change their opinion. In the third scenario, 41% of radiologists chose PN as opposed to 12.6% of urologists (p < 0.001). After reading the literature, 17.9% of radiologists changed their opinion compared to 17.9% of urologists (p < 0.001), in favor of DJS. Although the majority of urologists (63.4%) consistently perform primary URS, only 3, 37 and 21% preferred it for the first, second and third scenarios, respectively. CONCLUSION: The decision on the type of drainage of a stone-obstructing hydronephrosis should be individualized.