Initial Clinical Experience With a Novel Robotically Assisted Platform for Combined Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Flexible Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy.

PURPOSE: We sought to evaluate the technical feasibility of performing a combined robotically assisted mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and flexible ureteroscopy (URS) procedure by a single urologist using the MONARCH Platform, Urology (Johnson & Johnson MedTech, Redwood City, California). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this prospective, first-in-human clinical trial, 13 patients underwent robotically-assisted PCNL for renal calculi at the University of California-Irvine, Department of Urology. Successful completion of the procedure was assessed as the primary endpoint. Postoperative adverse events were monitored for 30 days following the completion of the procedure. Stone ablation efficiency was evaluated on postoperative day 30 with low-dose 2-3 mm slice CT scans. Patients were classified according to the maximum length of their residual stone fragments as either absolute stone-free (Grade A), < 2 mm remnants (Grade B), or 2.1-4.0 mm remnants (Grade C). RESULTS: The combined robotic mini-PCNL and URS procedure was successfully completed in 12 of 13 procedures. No robotic device-related adverse events occurred. Preoperative stone burden was quantified by both maximum linear measurement (median 32.8 mm) as well as by CT-based volume (median 1645.9 mm3). Using the unique robotically assisted targeting system, percutaneous access was gained directly through the center of the renal papilla in a single pass in all cases. Median operative time was 187 minutes (range: 83-383 minutes). On postoperative day 30, a 98.7% (range: 72.9%-100.0%) volume reduction was achieved, with 5 Grade A (38.5%), 1 Grade B (7.7%), and 2 Grade C (15.4%). Three patients experienced complications (2 grade 1 and one grade 2 Clavien-Dindo). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary investigation demonstrates the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of a unique robotic-assisted combined mini-PCNL and URS platform.

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.

Intrarenal pressures during flexible ureteroscopy: an insight into safer endourology.

OBJECTIVES: To assess intrarenal pressures (IRPs) and complication rates after flexible ureteroscopy (fURS), and to assess factors that contribute to raised IRPs and postoperative complications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After informed consent patients underwent fURS under general anaesthesia. The transducer of a 0.3556 mm (0.014″) pressure guidewire was placed in the renal pelvis for live recording of IRPs. The fURS procedures were performed in a routine manner under antibiotic cover with the aim of dusting the calculus to completion. The operating surgeon was blinded to the live-recorded IRPs. RESULTS: A total of 40 fURS procedures were performed in 37 patients (26 male and 11 female). The mean age was 50.5 years. As a cohort, the mean of average IRPs was 34.8 mmHg and the mean of maximal IRPs was 128.8 mmHg. Pearson's correlation showed a significant inverse correlation between the mean IRP and age (r[38]: -0.391, P = 0.013). Three cases experienced postoperative deviations from uncomplicated recovery, with two being hypotensive and one case being both hypotensive and hypoxic. Three cases returned to the emergency department within 30 days of surgery, with two cases of flank pain and one case of urosepsis with positive urine cultures. The patient presenting with urosepsis had exhibited IRPs exceeding the mean. CONCLUSION: The IRPs changed significantly from normal baseline levels during routine fURS. The mean IRP during fURS correlates with patient age, but not with other factors. The IRP may be related to increased complication rates at fURS. Understanding factors that influence IRP will allow urologists to better manage this intraoperatively.

Illumination matters part IV: blackout and whiteout in flexible ureteroscopy - first report on a phenomenon observed by PEARLS.

PURPOSE: To date, no study has evaluated effects of varying brightness settings on image quality from flexible ureteroscopes submerged in saline. The aim was to evaluate blackout and whiteout occurrences in an in-vitro kidney calyx model. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We evaluated a series of contemporary flexible ureteroscopes including the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, as well as OTU WiScope using a 3D-printed enclosed pink in-vitro kidney calyx model submerged in saline. Endoscopic images were captured with ureteroscope tip placed at 5 mm,10 mm and 20 mm distances. The complete range of brightness settings and video capture modes were evaluated for each scope. Distribution of brightness on a grayscale histogram of images was analyzed (scale range 0 to 255). Blackout and whiteout were defined as median histogram ranges from 0 to 35 and 220 to 255, respectively (monitor image too dark or too bright for the human eye, respectively). RESULTS: Blackout occurred with the P7, Pusen 7.5F, 9.2F and WiScope at all distances, and V3 at 20 mm - with lowest brightness settings. Whiteout occurred with Flex-X2s, V3 and P7 at 5 mm and 10 mm, as well as with V3 and P7 at 20 mm - mostly with highest brightness settings. The Flex-Xc had neither blackout nor whiteout at all settings and distances. CONCLUSION: Blackout or whiteout of images is an undesirable property that was found for several scopes, possibly impacting diagnostic and therapeutic purposes during ureteroscopy. These observations form a guide to impact a urologist's choice of instruments and settings.

Illumination matters Part II: advanced comparative analysis of flexible ureteroscopes in a kidney model by PEARLS.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate illumination properties in an in-vitro kidney calyx model in saline. DESIGN AND METHODS: We evaluated a series of contemporary flexible ureteroscopes including the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, as well as OTU WiScope using a 3D-printed closed pink kidney calyx model, submerged in saline. A spectrometer was used for illuminance and color temperature measurements at different openings located at center (direct light), 45° (direct and indirect light) and 90°(indirect light) to the axis of the scope. RESULTS: Maximum illuminance was at the center opening for all scopes (range: 284 to 12,058 lx at 50% brightness and 454 to 11,871 lx at 100% brightness settings). The scope with the highest center illuminance (Flex-Xc) was 26 times superior to the scope with the lowest illuminance (Pusen 7.5Fr) at 100% brightness setting. For each scope, there was a peripheral illuminance drop ranging from - 43 to - 92% at 50% brightness and - 43% to - 88% at 100% brightness settings, respectively (all p < 0.01). Highest drop was for the P7 and the Pusen 9.2F. All scopes had illuminance skew, except the V3. All scopes had a warm color temperature. CONCLUSION: Illumination properties vary between ureteroscopes in an enclosed cavity in saline, and differs at center vs 45° and 90° positions within scopes. Peripheral illuminance drop can be as high as - 92%, which is undesirable. This may affect the choice of ureteroscope and light brightness settings used in surgery by urologists.

Illumination matters Part III: Impact of light obstruction on illuminance from flexible ureteroscopes - a comparative PEARLS analysis.

PURPOSE: Artifacts from poor ureteroscopes' light design with shadowing and dark areas in the field of view have been reported. The aim was to quantify effects of light obstruction in a kidney calyx model. METHODS: We evaluated a series of contemporary flexible ureteroscopes including the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, as well as OTU Wiscope using an enclosed 3D-printed pink in vitro kidney calyx model submerged in saline, where the field of light was intentionally partially obstructed alternatively at 12, 3, 6, and 9 o'clock. A color spectrometer was used for illuminance measurements at a 45° opening position in the background of the model. RESULTS: Overall and mean background illuminance for each obstructive situation were significantly different between scopes for both 50% and 100% brightness settings (ANOVA p < 0.001). At 50% brightness setting, almost all scopes had their highest and lowest background illuminance with the 6 o'clock and 3 o'clock obstructive situation, respectively. At 100% brightness setting, these became 6 o'clock and 12 o'clock obstructive situations. Considering each obstructive situation individually, the Flex-Xc was consistently the scope with highest background illuminance and the Pusen 7.5F the lowest. Background illuminance for each obstructive situation varied significantly for each scope individually, with the greatest range of variability for Pusen 7.5F and V3. CONCLUSIONS: Illuminance performance of ureteroscopes within an obstructed calyx model differ significantly for various obstructive situations. Urologists should be aware of this to help guide their choice of ureteroscope.

Illumination matters part I: comparative analysis of light sources and illumination in flexible ureteroscopy-fundamental findings from a PEARLS analysis.

PURPOSE: Illumination characteristics of flexible ureteroscopes have been evaluated in air, but not in saline, the native operative medium for endourology. The aim was to evaluate light properties of contemporary ureteroscopes in air versus saline, light distribution analysis, and color temperature. METHODS: We evaluated the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, and OTU WiScope using a 3D printed black target board in-vitro model submerged in saline. A spectrometer was used for lux and color temperature measurements at different opening locations. RESULTS: Illuminance was higher in saline compared to air (5679 vs. 5205 lx with Flex-Xc, p = 0.02). Illuminance in saline differed between ureteroscopes (ANOVA p < 0.001), with highest for the Flex-Xc at 100% brightness setting (5679 lx), followed by Pusen 9.2F (5280 lx), Flex-X2s (4613 lx), P7 (4371 lx), V3 (2374 lx), WiScope (582 lx) and finally Pusen 7.5F (255 lx). The same ranking was found at 50% brightness setting, with the highest ureteroscope illuminance value 34 times that of the scope with lowest illuminance. Most scopes had maximum illuminance off center, with skewness. Three scopes had two light sources, with one light source for all other scopes. Inter-scope comparisons revealed significant differences of color temperature (ANOVA p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates the presence of inhomogeneous light spread as well as large differences in illumination properties of ureteroscopes, possibly impacting on the performance of individual scopes in vivo. Additionally, the study suggests that future studies on illumination characteristics of flexible ureteroscopes should ideally be done in saline, and no longer in air.

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.

The optimal ratio of endoscope-sheath diameter with negative-pressure ureteral access sheath: an in vitro research.

PURPOSE: To maintain safe intrarenal pelvic pressure (IPP), the combination of flexible ureteroscope (fURS) and traditional ureteral access sheath (T-UAS) should maintain a basic rule that is the ratio of endoscope-sheath diameter (RESD) ≤ 0.75. However, the negative-pressure ureteral access sheath (NP-UAS) may break the rule of negative pressure suction. This study aimed to examine the effect of NP-UAS on IPP and flow rate (FR) with varying RESD. METHODS: In a 3D-printed renal model, flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy (fURL) was replicated. Six sizes of fURS paired with 12Fr T-UAS and NP-UAS resulted in six distinct RESDs of 0.63, 0.78, 0.87, 0.89, 0.90, and 0.91. While the irrigation pressure (IRP) was set between 100 and 800 cmH2O and the sucking pressure (SP) was set between 0 and 800 cmH2O, the IPP and FR were measured in each RESD. RESULTS: NP-UASs can reduce the IPP and increase the FR at the same RESD compared to T-UASs. The IPP decreased with increasing SP with NP-UAS. When RESD ≤ 0.78, T-UAS and NP-UAS can maintain IPP < 40 cmH2O in most circumstances. When RESD = 0.87, it is challenging for T-UAS to sustain IPP < 40 cmH2O; however, NP-UAS can do so. When RESD ≥ 0.89, it is difficult to maintain an IPP < 40 cmH2O even with NP-UAS. CONCLUSION: NP-UAS can decrease IPP and increase FR compared with T-UAS. To maintain a safe IPP, it is recommended that RESD < 0.85 when utilizing NP-UAS.

Direct in-scope suction: an in vitro evaluation of a single use flexible ureteroscope with integrated suction capability.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the stone clearance rate and limitations of a novel integrated suction capability within a single-use flexible ureteroscope according to stone particle size. METHODS: Varying sized stone particles were created using a stone phantom (Begostone Plus, Bego ©, Lincoln, RI, USA). Particle size ranged as follows: 63-125 µm, 125-250 µm, 250-500 µm, 500 µm- 1 mm and 1-2 mm. These were mixed with Normal saline (0.9%) to mimic in vivo conditions. The suction enabled single-use flexible ureteroscope (Pusen, Zhuhai, China) was used to aspirate stone fragments in three trials. Firstly, aspiration of 5 g of each dust range was attempted. Secondly, a direct comparison of the integrated suction to a manual syringe technique was applied to 1 g of each size range. Finally, aspiration was applied to 5 g of a heterogenous 1:1:1:1:1 mixture. Endoscopic clearance rate (g/min) and number of blockages were recorded. Each challenge was repeated three times. RESULTS: The integrated suction cleared 100% of dust < 250 µm. Endoscopic clearance rates were significantly faster than manual aspiration (3.01 g/min versus 0.41 g/min) for dust between 125 and 250 µm (p = 0.008). Complete endoscopic clearance by 180 s (without encountering test limiting blockages) was unsuccessful for particles > 250 µm. Clearance rates were greatly limited by stone particle size heterogeneity above 250 µm, to 0.09 g/min. CONCLUSION: This technology works better in vitro than previously DISS evaluated methods when challenged by stone dust < 250 µm. However, this adaptation is significantly challenged in the presence of stone dust particles > 250 µm.

The impact of siphoning effect on renal pelvis pressure during ureteroscopy using an in vitro kidney and ureter model.

PURPOSE: To experimentally measure renal pelvis pressure (PRP) in an ureteroscopic model when applying a simple hydrodynamic principle, the siphoning effect. METHODS: A 9.5Fr disposable ureteroscope was inserted into a silicone kidney-ureter model with its tip positioned at the renal pelvis. Irrigation was delivered through the ureteroscope at 100 cm above the renal pelvis. A Y-shaped adapter was fitted onto the model's renal pelvis port, accommodating a pressure sensor and a 4 Fr ureteral access catheter (UAC) through each limb. The drainage flowrate through the UAC tip was measured for 60 s each run. The distal tip of the UAC was placed at various heights below or above the center of the renal pelvis to create a siphoning effect. All trials were performed in triplicate for two lengths of 4Fr UACs: 100 cm and 70 cm (modified from 100 cm). RESULTS: PRP was linearly dependent on the height difference from the center of the renal pelvis to the UAC tip for both tested UAC lengths. In our experimental setting, PRP can be reduced by 10 cmH20 simply by lowering the distal tip of a 4 Fr 70 cm UAC positioned alongside the ureteroscope by 19.7 cm. When using a 4 Fr 100 cm UAC, PRP can drop 10 cmH20 by lowering the distal tip of the UAC 23.3 cm below the level of the renal pelvis. CONCLUSION: Implementing the siphoning effect for managing PRP during ureteroscopy could potentially enhance safety and effectiveness.

Intrarenal pressure and flow rate profile using LithoVue™ elite: impact of different irrigation systems and working channel instruments.

PURPOSE: To report real-time IRP and FR while performing flexible ureteroscopy in porcine kidney model utilizing LithoVue™ Elite (Boston Scientific®) with different irrigation systems, including automated pumps. METHODS: Using an ex-vivo model of porcine kidney, IRPs were measured with LithoVue Elite. Ureteroscopic settings (US) were tested with all permutations of irrigation methods (IM), working channel occupant (WCO), and ureteral access sheaths (UAS). IMs included: Single Action Pumping System (SAPS™, Boston Scientific), Thermedx FluidSmart™ (Stryker®), and ENDOMAT™ (Karl Storz®). Pumps were tested at 50, 100, and 150 mmHg. WCOs included a 1.9Fr zero-tip basket, 200 µm, and 365 µm laser fibers. UASs utilized 11/13Fr and 12/14Fr 36 cm. RESULTS: 84 different US were tested (252 experiments). ENDOMAT had higher IRP but the same FR as Thermedx at the same US for 50 and 100 mmHg (p < 0.01). SAPS had higher IRP and FR than pumps in all US studies (p < 0.01). There was positive correlation between pressure set by the pump and both IRP and FR (rho > 0.9). As the diameter of the WCO increased, lower IRP and FR were observed with the pumps (p < 0.01). With SAPS, IRP was similar regardless of WCO, but FR was decreased with the increased diameter of WCO (p = 0.81 and p < 0.01, respectively). There was significantly higher IRP when using 11/13Fr UAS than 12/14Fr (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: IRP was higher with SAPS than automated pumps. ENDOMAT showed higher IRP than Thermedx when under 150 mmHg. IRP and FR increase with higher pump pressure and decrease with larger diameter WCO. Likewise, a larger UAS significantly reduced IRP.

Semirigid ureteroscopy and tamsulosin therapy as dilatation methods before flexible ureteroscopy: evaluation and benefits.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of semirigid ureteroscopy and tamsulosin therapy as dilatation methods before flexible ureteroscopy advancement to the renal collecting system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective study included patients with renal stones less than 2 cm who underwent retrograde flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy. The patients were randomized into two groups: group A patients were given a placebo for 1 week before flexible ureteroscopy, and group B patients were administered 0.4 mg of tamsulosin once daily for 1 week before surgery and underwent active dilatation using semirigid ureteroscopy before flexible ureteroscopy. The ability of the flexible ureteroscope to reach the collecting system in both groups during the same operative session was assessed. Operative outcomes and complications were collected and analyzed in both groups. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients were included in our study, with each group comprising 85 patients. In group B, the flexible ureteroscope successfully accessed the kidney in 61 patients, while in group A, the flexible ureteroscope was successful only in 28 cases (71.4% versus 32.9%). In group A, 33 (38.8%) patients had lower urinary tract symptoms compared to 17 (20.2%) patients in group B (P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Using tamsulosin therapy and semirigid ureteroscopy as dilatation methods before flexible ureteroscopy increased the success of primary flexible ureteroscopy advancement to renal collecting system.

Fluid absorption during flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To investigate fluid absorption and its influencing factors during flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure (RPP). METHODS: A total of 80 patients with upper urinary tract calculi underwent flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of RPP by pressure-measuring ureteral access sheath and were randomly divided into four groups. The RPP of Groups A, B, and C were set at - 5, 0 and 5 mmHg, respectively. Conventional flexible ureteroscopy with uncontrolled pressure served as control Group D. The perfusion flow rate was set at 100 ml/min in the four groups, with 20 patients in each group. The fluid absorption was measured by 1% ethanol every 10 min. Operation time, stone-free rate, and complications were recorded. RESULT: Seventy-three patients were finally included in the RCT. The general and preoperative data of the patients were comparable between the groups. The fluid absorption of Groups A, B, and C was significantly less than that of Group D (P < 0.01). Fluid absorption and operation time were positively correlated, and the correlation coefficients R were 0.864, 0.896, 0.918, and 0.947, respectively (P < 0.01). The fluid absorption of patients with vomiting, fever and ureteral injury was greater than that of patients without complications in the four groups (P < 0.01). In different groups, fluid absorption was greater in patients with ureteral injury Post-Ureteroscopic Lesion Scale (PULS) 1-3 than in noninjured patients (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of RPP effectively reduces the absorption of perfusion fluid. Operation time and ureteral injury are also key factors affecting perfusion fluid absorption. REGISTRATION NUMBER AND DATE: NCT05201599; August 11, 2021.

Play it safe: renal function after bilateral flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stones.

PURPOSE: We searched for perioperative renal function deterioration risk factors in patients that underwent bilateral flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) for kidney stones. METHODS: From August 2016 to February 2020, symptomatic patients > 18 years old with bilateral kidney stones up to 20 mm in each side were prospectively studied. Serum creatinine samples were collected on admission to surgery, immediate postoperative (IPO), on POD 3, 10, and 30. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation (CKD-EPI) without a race coefficient. RESULTS: Thirty patients underwent bilateral fURS. Comparing to preoperative eGFR, median IPO and POD3 eGFR (p < 0.001) were significantly lower, and POD10 (p = 0.092) and POD30 (p = 0.648) were similar to preoperative eGFR. During follow-up, 22/30 (73.3%), 14/30 (46.7%), and 7/30 (23.3%) of the patients presented a decrease > 10% eGFR, > 20% eGFR, and > 30% eGFR, respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that lower preoperative eGFR is a risk factor for eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, p = 0.019 [1.021-1.263; 1.136]; ASA > 1 is a risk factor for decrease of eGFR > 10%, p = 0.028 [1.25-51.13; 8.00]; longer operative time is a risk factor for decrease of eGFR > 20%, p = 0.042 [1.00-1.05; 1.028]; and operative time ≥ 120 min is a risk factor for decrease of eGFR > 30%, p = 0.026 [0.016-0.773; 0.113]. CONCLUSIONS: Renal function suffers a reversible decrease after bilateral fURS. Our study suggests that adequate selection of patients and maintaining operative time < 120 min are relevant factors in preventing acute renal function deterioration following bilateral fURS.

Factors affecting the intraoperative calculi excretion during flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy: an in vitro analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the parameters influencing intraoperative calculi excretion (ICE) during flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy (fURL) using in vitro simulation experiments. METHODS: 3D-printed human kidney models were used to simulate the elimination of gravel during fURL. The factors influencing the ICE during fURL were analyzed by comparing the effects of different degrees of hydronephrosis (mild, moderate, and severe), surgical positions (supine and lateral position), ratios of endoscope-sheath diameter (RESD) (0.625, 0.725, and 0.825), gravel sizes (0.50-1.00 mm, 0.25-0.50 mm, and 0.10-0.25 mm), and ureteral access sheaths (UASs) (traditional UAS and negative-pressure UAS) on ICE. RESULTS: The impacts of various UAS, RESD, degree of hydronephrosis, surgical positions, and gravel sizes on ICE were all significant (p < 0.05). We found no evidence of multicollinearity for all the independent variables, and the linear regression equation fitted as ICE ( g / min ) = 0.102 + 0.083 ∗ UAS grade - 0.050 ∗ RESD grade - 0.048 ∗ hydronephrosis grade + 0.065 ∗ position grade - 0.027 ∗ gravel size grade (R2 = 0.569). CONCLUSION: Employing negative-pressure UAS, smaller RESD, milder hydronephrosis, lateral position, and smaller gravel size contribute to improved ICE during fURL. Among them, the adoption of negative-pressure UAS had the most substantial effects.

Single use flexible ureteroscopes: a review of current technologies and cost effectiveness analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) has evolved into both diagnostic and therapeutic modalities. Our review discusses the cost-effectiveness of single use flexible ureteroscopes (su-fURS) and the use of these instruments in routine urological practice. RECENT FINDINGS: There are studies which support the use of su-fURS with an argument of both cost and clinical utility over reusable flexible ureteroscopes (ru-fURS). However, the cost may vary across countries, hence is difficult to compare the results based on the current literature. Perhaps therefore there is a role for hybrid strategy incorporating ru- and su-fURS, where su-fURS are employed in complex endourological cases with a high risk of scope damage or fracture to preserve ru-fURS, with the ability to maintain clinical activity in such an event. SUMMARY: While there seems to be some cost advantages with su-fURS with reduced sterilization and maintenance costs, the data supporting it is sparse and limited. This choice of scope would depend on the durability of ru-fURS, procedural volumes, limited availability of sterilization units in some centers and potential risk of infectious complications. It is time that cost-benefit analysis is conducted with defined outcomes for a given healthcare set-up to help with the decision making on the type of scope that best serves their needs.

Optimizing the outcome of non-pre-stented flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy regarding the quality of life, when to remove the stent?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the safety of short-term stenting following flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (fURL) for patients without preoperative stents. Retaining double-J stent for 1-2 weeks after fURL is a common practice. At present, data on short-term stenting after non-pre-stented fURL is still lacking. METHODS: 182 patients who met inclusion criteria were retrospectively divided into the 2-days group (2-day removal, 76 cases) and the 1-week group (1-week removal, 106 cases). The study endpoint was stent-associated adverse symptoms assessed by follow-up and completed validated questionnaires on postoperative days (POD) 7 and 12. A postoperative imaging review was performed 1 month after the surgery. RESULTS: No statistical differences were found in the patients' demographic and stone-related characteristics. The 2-days group showed fewer urinary tract symptoms and lower scores on the ureteral stent symptom questionnaire on POD 7: less backache during urination (p = 0.004), less hematuria (p = 0.031), less frequent urination (p = 0.004), lower urinary symptoms index (p < 0.001), lower general health index (p < 0.001), and lower performance index (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in fever (p = 0.372), visual analogue scale score (p = 0.760), and painkiller requirements (p = 0.160) on POD 7. The average general health score and work performance score remained significantly higher in the 1-week group patients at 5 days after removal compared to the 2-days group patients at 5 days after removal. (p < 0.001, p = 0.005). Five patients in the 2-days group and 15 patients in the 1-week group returned to the emergency department for additional treatments. No patient required rehospitalization. Stone-free rates were 85.5% in the 2-days group and 80.2% in the 1-week group (p = 0.499), respectively, and none of the patients got aggravating hydronephrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the common 1-week stent removal option, short-term stenting after non-pre-stented fURL is safe, which can enhance the patient's quality of life.

Clinical comparative study of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones: a retrospective case-controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones. METHODS: We enrolled 135 patients underwent reusable flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) and 78 patients underwent single-use digital FURS. Demographic, clinical variables, anatomical parameters of the lower calyx and perioperative indicators were compared in the two groups. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients in the infundibuloureter angle (IPA) < 45° subgroup had a mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), including 25 patients in the reusable FURS group and 11 patients in the single-use FURS group. The demographic and clinical variables in the two FURS groups were comparable. There was no statistical difference in the success rate of stone searching (P > 0.05). In terms of the success rate of lithotripsy, there was also no statistical difference in the IPA ≥ 45° subgroup (P > 0.05), whereas single-use FURS was superior in the IPA < 45° subgroup (χ2 = 6.513, P = 0.011). The length of the working fiber in the reusable FURS and single-use FURS groups was 3.20 ± 0.68 mm and 1.75 ± 0.47 mm, respectively (t = 18.297, P < 0.05). The use of a stone basket in the reusable FURS (31/135, 23.0%) was significantly higher than that in the single-use FURS (8/78, 10.3%) (χ2 = 5.336, P = 0.021). Compared with the reusable FURS group, the single-use FURS group had shorter operation times (P < 0.05) and higher stone-free rate (SFR) (χ2 = 4.230, P = 0.040). There was no statistical difference in the intraoperative transfer of mini-PCNL and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Single-use and reusable FURS are alternative methods for removal of lower pole stones (i.e., 2 cm or less). Single-use FURS has a high success rate of lithotripsy, shorter operation time, and high stone-free rate.

Effect of nephrostomy sheath size on renal pelvic pressure during endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery: artificial kidney model study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the intrarenal pelvic pressure in endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery using an artificial kidney model. METHODS: An artificial kidney model was created using the Urovac evacuator™. Four sizes of nephrostomy sheaths (MIP-L: 25/26 Fr, MIP-M: 16.5/17.5 Fr, MIP-S: 11/12 Fr, MIP-XS: 8.5/9.5 Fr) and two sizes of ureteral access sheaths (12/14 Fr and 10/12 Fr) were installed into the model. For each combination of nephrostomy and ureteral access sheath, renal pelvic pressure was measured with and without insertion of the retrograde flexible ureteroscope. Irrigation from the nephroscope was adjusted to 40-160 mmHg using an automatic irrigation device, and the irrigation of the ureteroscope was by spontaneous dripping at 80 cmH2O. Conditions were measured six times, and the renal pelvic pressure was compared in different conditions. RESULTS: Without ureteroscope insertion through the ureteral access sheath, the renal pelvic pressure never exceeded 30 mmHg. Meanwhile, when the ureteroscope was inserted, the renal pelvic pressure increased as the nephrostomy sheath and ureteral access sheath became narrower and as the irrigation pressure increased. Intrarenal pelvic pressure exceeded 30 mmHg when the irrigation pressure was increased in 12/14 Fr ureteral access sheath when MIP-XS was used, and in 10/12 Fr ureteral access sheath when MIP-XS and MIP-S were used. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a thin nephrostomy sheath in endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery can lead to increased intrarenal pelvic pressure. Although our results are from an artificial kidney model, special care is suggested to be required when using a retrograde flexible ureteroscope simultaneously in treatment of patients.