Evaluating the Safety of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS): Intra- and Early Postoperative Complications in Patients Enrolled in the Global Multicentre Flexible Ureteroscopy Outcome Registry (FLEXOR).

PURPOSE: To assess the incidence of the most common intra- and early postoperative complications following RIRS in a large series of patients with kidney stones. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with kidney stones who underwent RIRS across 21 centers from January 2018 to August 2021, as part of the Global Multicenter Flexible Ureteroscopy Outcome (FLEXOR) Registry. RESULTS: Among 6669 patients undergoing RIRS, 4.5% experienced intraoperative pelvicalyceal system bleeding without necessitating blood transfusion. Only 0.1% of patients, required a blood transfusion. The second most frequent intraoperative complication was ureteric injury due to the ureteral access sheath requiring stenting (1.8% of patients). Postoperatively, the most prevalent early complications were fever/infections requiring antibiotics (6.3%), blood transfusions (5.5%), and sepsis necessitating intensive care unit admission (1.3%). In cases of ureteric injury, a notably higher percentage of patients exhibited multiple stones and stone(s) in the lower pole, and these cases were correlated with prolonged lasing and overall surgical time. Hematuria requiring a blood transfusion was associated with an increased prevalence of larger median maximum stone diameters, particularly among patients with stones exceeding 20 mm. Furthermore, these cases exhibited a significant prolongation in surgical time. Sepsis necessitating admission to the intensive care unit was more prevalent among the elderly, concomitant with a significantly larger median maximum stone diameter. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis showed that RIRS has a good safety profile but bleeding requiring transfusions, ureteric injury, fever, and sepsis are still the most common complications despite advancements in technology.

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.

External validation of a nomogram for outcome prediction in management of medium-sized (1-2 cm) kidney stones.

BACKGROUND: Stone nomogram by Micali et al., able topredict treatment failure of shock-wave lithotripsy (SWL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) in the management of single 1-2 cm renal stones, was developed on 2605 patients and showed a high predictive accuracy, with an area under ROC curve of 0.793 at internal validation. The aim of the present study is to externally validate the model to assess whether it displayed a satisfactory predictive performance if applied to different populations. METHODS: External validation was retrospectively performed on 3025 patients who underwent an active stone treatment from December 2010 to June 2021 in 26 centers from four countries (Italy, USA, Spain, Argentina). Collected variables included: age, gender, previous renal surgery, preoperative urine culture, hydronephrosis, stone side, site, density, skin-to-stone distance. Treatment failure was the defined outcome (residual fragments >4 mm at three months CT-scan). RESULTS: Model discrimination in external validation datasets showed an area under ROC curve of 0.66 (95% 0.59-0.68) with adequate calibration. The retrospective fashion of the study and the lack of generalizability of the tool towards populations from Asia, Africa or Oceania represent limitations of the current analysis. CONCLUSIONS: According to the current findings, Micali's nomogram can be used for treatment prediction after SWL, RIRS and PNL; however, a lower discrimination performance than the one at internal validation should be acknowledged, reflecting geographical, temporal and domain limitation of external validation studies. Further prospective evaluation is required to refine and improve the nomogram findings and to validate its clinical value.

Current Standards for Training in Robot-assisted Surgery and Endourology: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Different training programs have been developed to improve trainee outcomes in urology. However, evidence on the optimal training methodology is sparse. Our aim was to provide a comprehensive description of the training programs available for urological robotic surgery and endourology, assess their validity, and highlight the fundamental elements of future training pathways. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The validity of each training model was assessed. The methodological quality of studies on metrics and curricula was graded using the MERSQI scale. The level of evidence (LoE) and level of recommendation for surgical curricula were awarded using the educational Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 75 studies were identified. Many simulators have been developed to aid trainees in mastering skills required for both robotic and endourology procedures, but only four demonstrated predictive validity. For assessment of trainee proficiency, we identified 18 in robotics training and six in endourology training; however, the majority are Likert-type scales. Although proficiency-based progression (PBP) curricula demonstrated superior outcomes to traditional training in preclinical settings, only four of six (67%) in robotics and three of nine (33%) in endourology are PBP-based. Among these, the Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery and the SIMULATE curricula have the highest LoE (level 1b). The lack of a quantitative synthesis is the main limitation of our study. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Training curricula that integrate simulators and PBP methodology have been introduced to standardize trainee outcomes in robotics and endourology. However, evidence regarding their educational impact remains restricted to preclinical studies. Efforts should be made to expand these training programs to different surgical procedures and assess their clinical impact. PATIENT SUMMARY: Simulation-based training and programs in which progression is based on proficiency represent the new standard of quality for achieving surgical proficiency in urology. Studies have demonstrated the educational impact of these approaches. However, there are still no standardized training pathways for several urology procedures.

Fluid dynamics within renal cavities during endoscopic stone surgery: does the position of the flexible ureteroscope and ureteral access sheath affect the outflow rate?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of ureteroscope position within renal cavities as well as different locations of the tip of the ureteral access sheath (UAS) on fluid dynamics during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational clinical study was performed. Measurements with a flexible ureteroscope placed in the upper, middle and lower calyces were obtained with the tip of the UAS placed either 2 cm below the pyelo-ureteric junction (PUJ), or at the level of the iliac crest. RESULTS: 74 patients were included. The outflow rates from the middle and upper calyxes were statistically significantly higher compared to the lower calyx, both with the UAS close to the pyelo-ureteric junction and at the iliac crest. When the UAS was withdrawn and positioned at the level of the iliac crest, a significant decrease in outflow rates from the upper (40.1 ± 4.3 ml/min vs 35.8 ± 4.1 ml/min) and middle calyces (40.6 ± 4.0 ml/min vs 36.8 ± 4.6 ml/min) and an increase in the outflow from the lower calyx (28.5 ± 3.3 ml/min vs 33.7 ± 5.7 ml/min) were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that higher fluid outflow rates are observed from upper and middle calyces compared to lower calyx. This was true when the UAS was positioned 2 cm below the PUJ and at the iliac crest. Significant worsening of fluid dynamics from upper and middle calyces was observed when the UAS was placed distally at the level of the iliac crest. While the difference was statistically significant, the absolute change was not significant. In contrast, for lower calyces, a statistically significant improvement was documented.

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.

Retrograde intrarenal surgery for asymptomatic incidental renal stones: a retrospective, real-world data analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine surgical outcomes and stone-free rates (SFRs) when offering upfront retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) to patients with asymptomatic incidental renal stones (AIRS), as active surveillance, shockwave lithotripsy or upfront intervention in patients with AIRS is still a debate among urologists. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective FLEXible Ureteroscopy Outcomes Registry (FLEXOR), supported by the Team of Worldwide Endourological Researchers (TOWER), examines adult patients who underwent RIRS. We analysed a subset of asymptomatic patients with renal stones on imaging who were treated with RIRS. Data includes patient characteristics, stone specifications, anaesthesia type, perioperative details, complications, and SFR. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess factors associated with the SFR. RESULTS: Among 679 patients with AIRS, 640 met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 55 years, with 33.4% being female. In all, 22.1% had positive urine cultures. The median stone diameter was 12 mm, commonly in lower and interpolar locations. RIRS was preferentially performed under general anaesthesia using a reusable scope in 443 cases. Prophylactic antibiotics were administered to 314 patients. The median operation time was 58 min and the median laser time was 24 min. The SFR was 68.8%. The use of holmium laser (odds ratio [OR] 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.63; P < 0.01) and multiple stones (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.76; P < 0.01) were factors associated with lower odds of being stone free. Overall complications were minimal, with sepsis in 1.6% of patients. Re-interventions were performed in 76 cases (11.8%), with RIRS being the most common in 67 cases (10.6%). CONCLUSION: Our multicentre real-world study is the first of its kind that highlights the pros and cons of offering RIRS to patients with AIRS and demonstrates a favourable SFR with acceptable complications. Pre-emptively discussing potential re-intervention helps patients make informed decisions, particularly in cases involving large and multiple stones.

Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet for Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Thulium fiber laser (TFL) emerged as a competitor of holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for the treatment of urinary stones. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy of renal and ureteral stones. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify reports published until May 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria, and data from 1286 and 880 patients who underwent, respectively, Ho:YAG and TFL laser lithotripsy were reviewed. Most studies included ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgeries as procedures, two included percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and one included URS exclusively. Only two studies reported results in pediatric patients. TFL was associated with a higher SFR (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-3.20; p = 0.031) when no residual fragment is considered, but not when SFR refers to the presence of fragments <3 mm (OR 2.48, 95% CI: 0.98-6.29; p = 0.055) or when only Ho:YAG with MOSES is considered (p = 0.068). According to the stones' location, TFL was associated with higher SFRs than Ho:YAG for renal (OR 3.14, 95% CI: 1.69-5.86; p < 0.001) but not for ureteral (p = 0.8) stones. TFL was associated with a lower intraoperative complication rate (OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.19-0.63; p < 0.001). No difference was found in major (p = 0.4) or overall (p = 0.4) complication rate, operative time (p = 0.051), and laser time (p = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: TFL is a promising laser for the treatment of urinary stones with some advantages over Ho:YAG. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and optimize the surgical settings. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of thulium fiber laser rather than holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet permits to reach a higher stone-free rate in stones located in the kidney rather than in the ureter.

Worldwide trends of practice and intervention in paediatric endourology: comparison of European versus Non-European responses.

Introduction: The area of paediatric endourology is unique and is recognised to be challenging, and it requires a certain level of focused training and expertise. Our aim was to conduct a worldwide survey in order to gain an overview regarding the current practice patterns for minimally invasive treatments of paediatric upper urinary tract stone patients. Material and methods: The survey was distributed between December 2021 and April 2022 through urology sections and societies in United Kingdom, Latin America and Asia. The survey was made up of 20 questions and it was distributed online using the free online Google Forms (TM). Results: 221 urologists answered the survey with 56 responses each from India, South America and UK and 53 responses from the rest of Europe (15 countries). In total, 163 responders (73.7%) managed paediatric stone patients in their daily practice. Of the responders, 60.2% were adult urologists and 39.8% were paediatric urologists. 12.9% adult urologists and 20.4% paediatric urologists run independent clinics while some run combined adult and paediatric clinics sometimes with the support of the nephrologists. Only 33.9% urologists offered all surgical treatments [extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS)]. Conclusions: Treatment of paediatric stones can vary according to country and legislations. Based on the results of this survey, minimally invasive methods such as URS and mini PCNL seem to have become more popular. In most institutions a collaboration exists between adult and paediatric urologists, which is the key for a tailored decision making, counselling and treatment success.

Patient Perspectives on Kidney Stone Surgery: A Content Analysis of Instagram Posts by Patients Versus Surgeons.

Background: Both clinicians and patients use social media to post about health care issues such as kidney stone disease, but their perspectives may differ. Objective: To evaluate content and themes regarding kidney stone surgery shared by patients and urologists on Instagram. Design setting and participants: A search was performed on Instagram using the term "kidney stone surgery". The first 100 posts from individuals who were clearly identified as a patient were assessed. We also assessed 100 posts from self-identified urologists. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: A previously published system was applied as a framework for categorizing the information collected. Outcomes of interested included pain, recovery, and costs. Results and limitations: Some 71% of the patients were female and most of their posts (52%) were shared postoperatively. The most common themes covered in patient posts were the need for multiple operative sessions (45%), pain (43%), and recovery (42%). Other themes included activities of daily life (18%), return to work (11%), nervousness (16%), stent issues (31%), stent on a string (5%), diet and prevention (9%), gratitude for health care services (10%), disease recurrence (18%), and costs (10%). Some 94% of the urologists were male and their posts covered the following domains: recovery (11%), stent issues (3%), pain (1%), stent on a string (1%), gratitude for health care services (1%), and recurrence 1%. Among the posts from urologists, 79% included self-promotion and 52% covered new technology. Overall, 10% contained false information. The majority of the posts with surgical images had no clear statement regarding patient consent (97%). Conclusions: Kidney stone surgery can affect many areas of a patient's quality of life. Most of the posts shared by patients were negative. Posts shared by urologists do not reflect the same themes. Moreover, there appears to be poor adherence to European Association of Urology recommendations regarding online professional conduct. Patient summary: Many patients use social media to share their experiences of kidney stone surgery. Posts are largely related to quality-of-life issues and are mostly negative. While urologists also use social media, the content they post on professional accounts is mostly focused on new technology and career promotion.

Laser Ablation Efficiency, Laser Ablation Speed, and Laser Energy Consumption During Lithotripsy: What Are They and How Are They Defined? A Systematic Review and Proposal for a Standardized Terminology.

CONTEXT: Laser performance for lithotripsy is currently reported using units of measurement such as J/mm3, mm3/J, mm3/s, s/mm3, and mm3/min. However, there are no current standardized definitions or terminology for these metrics. This may lead to confusion when assessing and comparing different laser systems. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to summarize outcome values and corresponding terminology from studies on laser lithotripsy performance using stone volume in relation to time or energy. The secondary objective was to propose a standardized terminology for reporting laser performance metrics. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using the search string ("j*/mm3" OR "mm3/j*" OR "mm3/s*" OR "s*/mm3" OR "mm3/min*" OR "min*/mm3" AND "lithotripsy") on Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed databases. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by two authors. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of 28 studies were included, covering holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG), MOSES, and thulium fiber laser (TFL) technologies. Laser energy consumption values reported for the studies ranged from 2.0 - 43.5 J/mm3in vitro and from 2.7 - 47.8 J/mm3in vivo, translating to laser ablation efficiency of 0.023 - 0.500 mm3/J and 0.021 - 0.370 mm3/J, respectively. Laser ablation speeds ranged from 0.3 - 8.5 mm3/s in vivo, translating to lasing time consumption of 0.12 - 3.33 s/mm3. Laser efficacy ranged from 4.35 - 51.7 mm3/min in vivo. There was high heterogeneity for the terminology used to describe laser performance for the same metrics. CONCLUSIONS: The range of laser performance metric values relating stone volume to energy or time is wide, with corresponding differing terminology. We propose a standardized terminology for future studies on laser lithotripsy, including laser ablation efficiency (mm3/J), laser ablation speed (mm3/s), and laser energy consumption (J/mm3). Laser efficacy (mm3/min) is proposed as a broader term that is based on the total operative time, encompassing the whole technique using the laser. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed studies to identify the units and terms used for laser performance when treating urinary stones. The review revealed a wide range of differing units, outcomes, and terms. Therefore, we propose a standardized terminology for future studies on laser stone treatment.

The Prime Time for Flexible Ureteroscopy for Large Renal Stones Is Coming: Is Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy No Longer Needed?

Advances in laser technology and surgical telescopic systems have propelled retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) to the forefront as a viable alternative to percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Currently, RIRS is being increasingly utilized as a treatment option, even for kidney stones larger than 2 cm. In this narrative review, we aimed to take a snapshot of current practice in renal stone treatment and the latest technological and technical developments and to evaluate the efficacy of RIRS in larger renal stones. With low complication rates and acceptable stone-free rates, RIRS offers patients a less invasive option with favorable outcomes. There are insufficient data comparing PCNL with RIRS using a new-generation high-power laser and suctioning ureteral access sheath (UAS). Further studies with novel lasers and UAS could provide superiority in terms of RIRS. It is crucial to take into account various patient-specific considerations, such as stone location and burden, when deciding on the appropriate treatment approach.

New Technologies in Endourology and Laser Lithotripsy: The Need for Evidence in Comprehensive Clinical Settings.

Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) with laser lithotripsy is currently the gold standard surgical treatment for ureteral and kidney stones with a maximum diameter of 2 cm [...].

Perceptions and Practice Patterns of Urologists Relating to Intrarenal Pressure During Ureteroscopy: Findings from a Global Cross-Sectional Analysis.

Objectives: To explore beliefs and practice patterns of urologists regarding intrarenal pressure (IRP) during ureteroscopy (URS). Methods: A customized questionnaire was designed in a 4-step iterative process incorporating a systematic review of the literature and critical analysis of topics/questions by six endourologists. The 19-item questionnaire interrogated perceptions, practice patterns, and key areas of uncertainty regarding ureteroscopic IRP, and was disseminated via urologic societies, networks, and social media to the international urologic community. Consultants/attendings and trainees currently practicing urology were eligible to respond. Quantitative responses were compiled and analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square test, with subgroup analysis by procedure volume. Results: Responses were received from 522 urologists, practicing in six continents. The individual question response rate was >97%. Most (83.9%, 437/515) respondents were practicing at a consultant/attending level. An endourology fellowship incorporating stone management had been completed by 59.2% (307/519). The vast majority of respondents (85.4%, 446/520) scored the perceived clinical significance of IRP during URS ≥7/10 on a Likert scale. Concern was uniformly reported, with no difference between respondents with and without a high annual case volume (p = 0.16). Potential adverse outcomes respondents associated with elevated ureteroscopic IRP were urosepsis (96.2%, 501/520), collecting system rupture (80.8%, 421/520), postoperative pain (67%, 349/520), bleeding (63.72%, 332/520), and long-term renal damage (26.1%, 136/520). Almost all participants (96.2%, 501/520) used measures aiming to reduce IRP during URS. Regarding the perceived maximum acceptable threshold for mean IRP during URS, 30 mm Hg (40 cm H2O) was most frequently selected [23.2% (119/463)], with most participants (78.2%, 341/463) choosing a value ≤40 mm Hg. Conclusions: This is the first large-scale analysis of urologists' perceptions of ureteroscopic IRP. It identifies high levels of concern among the global urologic community, with almost unanimous agreement that elevated IRP is associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Equipoise remains regarding appropriate IRP limits intraoperatively and the most appropriate technical strategies to ensure adherence to these.

Does age impact outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery in the elderly? Results from 366 patients from the FLEXible ureteroscopy outcomes registry (FLEXOR).

BACKGROUND: There has been a consistent increase in the last decades in prevalence of renal stones in elderly. AIMS: To evaluate outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones in elderly and factors associated with postoperative complications and residual fragments (RFs). METHODS: Data from 12 centers were retrospectively reviewed. INCLUSION CRITERIA: ≥ 75 years, renal stones only, normal renal anatomy. Patients were divided into three groups; Group 1: patients aged 75-79 years; Group 2: age 80-84 years; Group 3: age ≥ 85 years. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess factors associated with perioperative complications, sepsis, and RFs. RESULTS: 366 patients were included. There were 189 patients in Group 1, 113 in Group 2, and 64 in Group 3. There was no difference between groups regarding stone features and total surgical time. Median length of stay was significantly longer in Group 3 (6.0 days, vs 2.0 days in Group 2 vs 2.5 days in Group 1, p = 0.043). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications and RFs between the groups. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, female gender (OR 2.82) and maximum stone diameter (OR 1.14) were associated with higher odds of sepsis, while surgical time (OR 1.12) and the use of a reusable ureteroscope (OR 6.51) with overall complications. Stone size (OR 1.23) was associated with higher odds of RFs. CONCLUSION: RIRS showed safety and efficacy for kidney stones in elderly patients. Surgical time should be kept as short as possible to avoid higher odds of postoperative complications, particularly in females.

Radiation exposure during different percutaneous renal puncture techniques: A YAU endourology & urolithiasis study.

PURPOSE: Radiation exposure is affected by C-arm fluoroscopy device positioning during percutaneous renal puncture. Our aim was to compare the exposure of surgeon's lens, hand and chest with a fluoroscopy protocol replicated in different C-arm positions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A standardized fluoroscopy protocol was created using water-equivalent solid phantoms to replicate a surgeon and patient. 111 mGy radiation (360 s) was applied in standard fluoroscopy mode (91 kVp, 2.7 mA/mAs). Dosimeters were placed on lens, chest and hand of surgeon and patient phantom models. 7 different C-arm positions were created: 0°, mediolateral (ML) +90°, ML -90°, ML +30°, ML -15°, craniocaudal (CC) +30°, CC +15°. Measurements were evaluated separately for different positions. RESULTS: The highest radiation exposure was measured on patient dosimeter (2.97 mSv). The highest exposure on surgeon was recorded on finger dosimeter in all C-arm positions; highest dose was recorded in ML +90° position (2.88 mSv). In finger dosimeters, lowest exposure was recorded in 0° position (0.51 mSv). The lowest exposure of all positions was measured in chest dosimeter in ML -90° position (0.24 mSv). CONCLUSIONS: In positions where X-ray generator of the C-arm was facing towards the surgeon, radiation exposure measured in all dosimeters was higher compared to positions where the generator was facing away. The hand radiation exposure in all positions was higher than chest and lens. Special care must be taken to avoid facing the X-ray generator tube and hands should be as well-protected as chest and eyes with special protective gear.