The relationship between the force applied and perceived by the surgeon during ureteral access sheath placement: ex-vivo experimental model.

PURPOSE: To define a peak force of insertion (PFOI) threshold for ureteral damage during ureteral access sheath (UAS) placement on an experimental ureteral orifice model. METHODS: A specially designed water tank using 2 laparoscopic 5 mm ports and 2 different size (10 Fr and 8 Fr) sealing cap adaptors (SCA) as ureteral orifices was used to perform the test. A 10-12 Fr UAS was fixed to a load cell and the force of insertion (FOI) was continuously recorded with a digital force gauge.13 experts in the field of endourology who participated performed 3 UAS insertions. The FOI was recorded initially with 10 Fr followed by 8 Fr SCA. On the final insertion, the orifice was obstructed, leaving a 5 cm length to insert the UAS. The experts were asked to "Stop at the point they anticipate ureteral damage, and they would not proceed in real life". RESULTS: Using 10 Fr SCA the PFOI was 2.12 ± 0.58 Newton (N) (range:1.48-3.48) while 8 Fr SCA showed a PFOI 5.76 ± 0.96 N (range:4.05-7.35). Six of the experts, said they would stop proceeding when they reached above 5.1 N. Three experts had PFOI < 5.1 N and the other 4 stated they would go with PFOIs of 5.88, 6.16, 6.69 and 7.35 N when using SCA of 8 Fr.The highest load they would stop proceeding had a PFOI of 6.09 ± 1.87 N (range: 2.53-10.74). CONCLUSION: The PFOI threshold for ureteral damage inserting UAS of the experts is variable. Although FOI is a subjective perception, experience suggests that ureteral injury may occur at an average of 6.05 N perceived by surgeons' tactile feedback. In-vivo measurement of UAS PFOI may confirm a threshold.

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the treatment of urolithiasis: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training-Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (T.R.U.S.T.)-Group.

PURPOSE: To identify laser lithotripsy settings used by experts for specific clinical scenarios and to identify preventive measures to reduce complications. METHODS: After literature research to identify relevant questions, a survey was conducted and sent to laser experts. Participants were asked for preferred laser settings during specific clinical lithotripsy scenarios. Different settings were compared for the reported laser types, and common settings and preventive measures were identified. RESULTS: Twenty-six laser experts fully returned the survey. Holmium-yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) was the primary laser used (88%), followed by thulium fiber laser (TFL) (42%) and pulsed thulium-yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Tm:YAG) (23%). For most scenarios, we could not identify relevant differences among laser settings. However, the laser power was significantly different for middle-ureteral (p = 0.027), pelvic (p = 0.047), and lower pole stone (p = 0.018) lithotripsy. Fragmentation or a combined fragmentation with dusting was more common for Ho:YAG and pulsed Tm:YAG lasers, whereas dusting or a combination of dusting and fragmentation was more common for TFL lasers. Experts prefer long pulse modes for Ho:YAG lasers to short pulse modes for TFL lasers. Thermal injury due to temperature development during lithotripsy is seriously considered by experts, with preventive measures applied routinely. CONCLUSIONS: Laser settings do not vary significantly between commonly used lasers for lithotripsy. Lithotripsy techniques and settings mainly depend on the generated laser pulse's and generator settings' physical characteristics. Preventive measures such as maximum power limits, intermittent laser activation, and ureteral access sheaths are commonly used by experts to decrease thermal injury-caused complications.

Pattern of key opinion leaders talks at major international urological meetings reflects the main differences in flexible ureteroscopy and PCNL diffusion.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the pattern of speaker activity related to both flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) during plenary sessions at the main (endo)urological international meetings over the last 10 years. METHODS: We reviewed the meeting programs of the main endourological international meetings (EAU, AUA, WCE, and SIU) during 2011-2019. We detected all invited speakers at plenary sessions regarding fURS or PCNL. The proportion of fURS and PCNL talks was evaluated yearly during the study period. In order to analyze plenary session speaker composition, we estimated and compared the mean number of talks per speaker according to surgical technique. We also analyzed possible differences in age distribution according to the topic of the talk as well as the presence of young (i.e., < 45 years) speakers. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: During the last 10 years, a total of 498 plenary talks were found. Of those, 260 (52.2%), 211 (42.4%), and 27 (5.4%) discussed PCNL, fURS, or both, respectively. PCNL was more frequently discussed at the beginning and the end of the study period. Mean [SD] number of talks per speaker was higher for PCNL (2.9 [3.4] vs 1.6 [1.4], p < 0.001), meaning that a wider variety of speakers was invited to give fURS talks. Speakers discussing fURS were younger (median [interquartile range, IQR] age 48 [44-56] vs 52 [47-60] years, p < 0.001), and a higher proportion of young speakers was observed in the fURS group (26% vs 15% p < 0.001). PCNL speakers were more commonly discussing fURS than fURS speakers discussing PCNL (23% vs 17%, p = 0.43). CONCLUSIONS: We found a wider variety of speakers at fURS plenary sessions as compared to PCNL ones. It is easier and quicker to become an internationally recognized expert in the field of fURS rather than PCNL. PCNL speakers were able to master fURS more frequently than the other way around.

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the treatment of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (T.R.U.S.T.) group.

PURPOSE: To highlight and compare experts' laser settings during endoscopic laser treatment of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), to identify measures to reduce complications, and to propose guidance for endourologists. METHODS: Following a focused literature search to identify relevant questions, a survey was sent to laser experts. We asked participants for typical settings during specific scenarios (ureteroscopy (URS), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), and percutaneous treatment). These settings were compared among the reported laser types to find common settings and limits. Additionally, we identified preventive measures commonly applied during surgery. RESULTS: Twenty experts completed the survey, needing a mean time of 12.7 min. Overall, most common laser type was Holmium-Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Ho:YAG) (70%, 14/20) followed by Thulium fiber laser (TFL) (45%, 9/20), pulsed Thulium-Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Tm:YAG) (3/20, 15%), and continuous wave (cw)Tm:YAG (1/20, 5%). Pulse energy for the treatment of distal ureteral tumors was significantly different with median settings of 0.9 J, 1 J and 0.45 J for Ho:YAG, TFL and pulsed Tm:YAG, respectively (p = 0.048). During URS and RIRS, pulse shapes were significantly different, with Ho:YAG being used in long pulse and TFL in short pulse mode (all p < 0.05). We did not find further disparities. CONCLUSION: Ho:YAG is used by most experts, while TFL is the most promising alternative. Laser settings largely do not vary significantly. However, further research with novel lasers is necessary to define the optimal approach. With the recent introduction of small caliber and more flexible scopes, minimal-invasive UTUC treatment is further undergoing an extension of applicability in appropriately selected patients.

Dusting efficacy between the regular setting of holmium laser (Ho:YAG) versus Vapor Tunnel pulse modality for non-complex kidney stones.

The new pulse modality Vapor-Tunnel™ (VT) consists of a very long pulse that uses the minimum peak power, causing the energy to pass through a previously created vapor channel or tunnel. The first part of the pulse creates a vapor channel, whereas the remaining energy is discharged immediately after, passing straight through the previously created tunnel. The aim of this study is to compare the dusting efficacy between Ho:YAG laser with long pulse and Ho:YAG laser with VT for non-complex kidney stones. A retrospective comparative study of 236 patients who underwent retrograde intrarenal surgery using Ho:YAG laser (long pulse vs. VT) was performed. Stone size, stone density, laser settings, laser emission time, and total operative time were recorded. We also assessed the lithotripsy efficacy (J/mm3). The stone-free rate was defined as the absence of stone fragments in a non-contrast abdominal computed tomography 4 weeks after the procedure. A total of 118 patients were included in each group. There was no significant difference in age, gender, and body mass index. Median stone volume (737 mm3 vs. 636 mm3) and stone density (788 HU vs. 656 HU) were higher in the VT group. Total energy used (14.5 J vs. 18.2 J), the laser emission time (20 min vs. 26 min), and the total operative time (79.5 min vs. 95 min) were significantly lower in the VT group. The stone-free rate was comparable between both groups (74.5% for VT and 66.1% for the long-pulse group, p = 0.15). When we evaluated the efficacy of laser lithotripsy, a significantly lower difference was obtained in the VT group (median 12.5 J/mm3 vs. median 23.1 J/mm3). The VT pulse modality was associated with decreased laser time and operative time. Additionally, it increased lithotripsy efficacy compared to Ho:YAG long pulse laser, but with a comparable free-stone rate.

Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy for treating urolithiasis in ectopic pelvic kidneys.

INTRODUCTION: The management of urolithiasis ectopic pelvic kidneys (EPK) can be challenging because of the aberrant anatomy (1-4). We demonstrate the step-by-step technique of the laparoscopic approach for treating urolithiasis in EPK. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three men with EPK (2 left, 1 right) underwent laparoscopic pyelolithotomy through a transperitoneal approach. After establishing the pneumoperitoneum, the parietal peritoneum was opened at the parietal colic sulcus and the bowel displaced medially. The kidney was identified in the retroperitoneum and the renal pelvis exposed after removal of the perirenal adipose tissue. The renal pelvis was opened, and the stones were identified and retrieved with forceps in 2 cases and with a flexible nephroscope in 1 case. The renal pelvis was closed with a 3/0 running barbed suture. A DJ stent was placed in all patients. RESULTS: For the first time, a laparoscopic technique for treating stones in the ectopic kidney is demonstrated in detail. Mean patient age was 52.6 years (44-58). The mean stone size was 22.3 mm (20-24 mm). Stones were in the renal pelvis in 2 cases and in the inferior calyx in 1 case. Mean operative time was 146 minutes (135-155 min). Mean estimated blood loss was 116 ml (60-140 ml). No complications were observed. The mean hospital stay was 3 days. The DJ stents were removed after 3 weeks. All patients were stone free at the postoperative CT scan with a mean follow-up of 3.3 months (1-6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy can be an effective and reproducible minimally invasive technique for treating urolithiasis in EPK.

Supine versus Prone Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Complex Stones: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: High-quality evidence comparing supine to prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for the treatment of complex stones is lacking. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of supine position (SUP) and prone position (PRO) PCNL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A noninferior randomized controlled trial was performed according to the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards for Reporting Trials) criteria. The inclusion criteria were patients over 18 years of age with complex stones. SUP was performed in the Barts flank-free modified position. Except for positioning, all the surgical parameters were identical. The primary outcome was the difference in the success rate on the first postoperative day (POD1) between groups. The secondary outcome was the difference in the stone-free rate (SFR) on the 90th postoperative day (final SFR). A noninferiority margin of 15% was used. Demographic, operative, and safety variables were compared between the groups. Statistical significance was set at p <0.05. RESULTS: Overall, 112 patients were randomized and their demographic characteristics were comparable. The success rates on POD1 were similar (SUP: 62.5% vs PRO: 57.1%, p=0.563). The difference observed (-5.4%) was lower than the predefined limit. The final SFRs were also similar (SUP: 55.4% vs PRO: 50.0%, p=0.571). SUP had a shorter operative time (mean±SD 117.9±39.1 minutes vs 147.6±38.8 minutes, p <0.001) and PRO had a higher rate of Clavien ≥3 complications (14.3% vs 3.6%, p=0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Positioning during PCNL for complex kidney stones did not impact the success rates; consequently, both positions may be suitable. However, SUP might be associated with a lower high-grade complication rate.

Decision making and treatment options in endourology post-coronavirus disease 2019 - adapting to the future.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To describe and critically discuss the most recent evidence regarding stone management during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and post-COVID-19 era. RECENT FINDINGS: There is a need to plan for resuming the normal elective stone surgery in the post-COVID era, keeping a clear record of all surgeries that are being deferred and identifying subgroups of surgical priorities, for the de-escalation phase. Telehealth is very useful because it contributes to reduce virus dissemination guaranteeing at the same time an adequate response to patients' care needs. Once the pandemic is over, teleurology will continue to be utilized to offer cost-effective care to urological patients and it will be totally integrated in our clinical practice. SUMMARY: This COVID-19 pandemic represents a real challenge for all national health providers: on the one hand, every effort should be made to assist COVID patients, while on the other hand we must remember that all other diseases have not disappeared in the meanwhile and they will urgently need to be treated as soon as the pandemic is more under control. A correct prioritization of cases when surgical activity will progressively return back to normality is of paramount importance.

Does working channel position influence the effectiveness of flexible ureteroscopy? Results from an in vitro study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the position of the working channel affects the effectiveness of flexible ureteroscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared the ureteroscopes Flex-X2S and Flex-XC (working channel at the 9 and 3 o'clock positions, respectively) in eight cavities of a K-Box model, simulating the distribution of the right and left intrarenal calyces. In the first and second settings, each cavity contained a 1-cm stone, lying on the bottom and fixed on the anterior sheet covering the box, respectively. In the third setting, the posterior and lateral surface of each cavity was draped with graph paper. Once the flexible ureteroscope entered each cavity, we measured and compared (i) the proportion of stone surface targeted by the laser (STL) and (ii) the proportion of graph paper burned by the laser (PBL) obtained with the two instruments. RESULTS: Higher STLs and PBLs were obtained with the 3 o'clock position than the 9 o'clock position in the right posterior and left anterior cavities (mean ± sd STL 87% ± 15% vs 46% ± 38% and 78% ± 35% vs 43% ± 24%, respectively; P < 0.05), and on the right posterior surfaces of the middle-lower/lower cavities (PBL 72% vs 31% and 77% vs 35%, respectively; P < 0.01) and on the left lateral surface of the lower cavities (PBL 45% vs 25%; P = 0048), respectively. Conversely, the 9 o'clock position provided higher STLs and PBLs than the 3 o'clock position in the left posterior and right anterior cavities (mean ± sd STL 84% ± 20% vs 65% ± 28% and 79% ± 30% vs 44% ± 35%, respectively; P ≤ 0.02), and on the left posterior and right lateral surfaces of the lower cavities (PBL 59% vs 34% and 50% vs 21%, respectively; P ≤ 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The position of the working channel of the flexible ureteroscope should be considered when planning flexible ureteroscopy, especially when dealing with the lower pole.

Complications of ureteroscopy: a complete overview.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this paper was to give a complete overview of all published complications associated with ureteroscopy and their according management and prevention in current urological practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review was registered in PROSPERO with registration number CRD42018116273. A bibliographic search of the Medline, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science databases was performed by two authors (V.D.C. and E.X.K.). According to the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome (PICO) study design approach and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) standards, a consensus between these authors was found relating to the thematic structure of this review. RESULTS: Ureteral stent discomfort, ureteral wall injury and stone migration are the most frequently reported complications. The worst complications include urosepsis, multi-organ failure and death. Incidence rates on these and other complications varied extensively between the reviewed reports. CONCLUSION: Ureteroscopy seems to be associated with more complications than currently reported. The present overview may help urologists to prevent, recognize and solve complications of ureteroscopy. It may also stimulate colleagues to perform prospective studies using standardized systems for classifying complications. These are warranted to compare results among different studies, to conduct meta-analyses, to inform health care workers and to counsel patients correctly about possible risks of ureteroscopy.

Consultation on UTUC, Stockholm 2018: aspects of treatment.

PURPOSE: To provide an overview of treatment modalities for management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). METHODS: In accordance with the standards for a scoping review, data presentation and discussion at the Consultation on UTUC in Stockholm, 6-7 September 2018, consensus was reached on the latest and most important treatment recommendations for UTUC. Using Pubmed, Web of Science, and Embase, publications were selected based on quality, clinical relevance, and level of evidence. RESULTS: Kidney-sparing surgery should be attempted for low-grade UTUC. Radical nephroureterectomy with bladder cuff excision is first option for high-grade disease. Post-operative bladder instillation of chemotherapy should be offered after RNU to reduce intravesical recurrence rate. Identification of tumor grade and stage is crucial when selecting treatment. Ureteroscopic management of low-grade and non-invasive UTUC achieves disease-free survival similar to that offered by radical nephroureterectomy but seems to be a risk factor for intravesical recurrence. Lymphadenectomy appears important for high-risk disease, although the therapeutic benefit needs further validation. There is little evidence supporting use of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) and mitomycin C as monotherapy and adjuvant treatment in UTUC. A randomized clinical trial has indicated that platin-based chemotherapy for invasive UTUC improves disease-free survival, suggesting that adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered standard care for ≥ T2 N0-3M0 disease. CONCLUSIONS: Risk stratification assessment is feasible and mandatory in UTUC. Identification of tumor grade and stage is essential for optimal treatment selection. Kidney-sparing surgery should be offered in low-risk disease, whereas radical nephroureterectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy should be considered in high-risk disease.

Consultation on UTUC, Stockholm 2018 aspects of diagnosis of upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To summarize knowledge on upper urinary tract carcinoma (UTUC) regarding diagnostic procedures, risk factors and prognostic markers. METHODS: A scoping review approach was applied to search literature in Pubmed, Web of Science, and Embase. Consensus was reached through discussions at Consultation on UTUC in Stockholm, September 2018. RESULTS: Tumor stage and grade are the most important prognostic factors. CT urography (CTU) including corticomedullary phase is the preferred imaging modality. A clear tumor on CTU in combination with high-grade UTUC in urine cytology identifies high-risk UTUC, and in some cases indirect staging can be obtained. Bladder urine cytology has limited sensitivity, and in most cases ureterorenoscopy (URS) with in situ samples for cytology and histopathology are mandatory for exact diagnosis. Image-enhancing techniques, Image S1 and narrow-band imaging, may improve tumor detection at URS. Direct confocal laser endomicroscopy may help to define grade during URS. There is strong correlation between stage and grade, accordingly correct grading is crucial. The correlation is more pronounced using the 1999 WHO than the 2004 classification: however, the 1999 system risks greater interobserver variability. Using both systems is advisable. A number of tissue-based molecular markers have been studied. None has proven ready for use in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Correct grading and staging of UTUC are mandatory for adequate treatment decisions. Optimal diagnostic workup should include CTU with corticomedullary phase, URS with in situ cytology and biopsies. Both WHO classification systems (1999 and 2004) should be used to decrease risk of undergrading or overtreatment.

Update of the ICUD-SIU consultation on stone technology behind ureteroscopy.

INTRODUCTION: Ureteroscopy is now the most frequent treatment used around the world for stone disease. Technological advancement, efficiency, safety, and minimally invasiveness of this procedure are some of the reasons for this change of trend. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this review of the literature, a search of the PubMed database was conducted to identify articles related to ureteroscopy and accessories. The committee assigned by the International Consultation on Urological Disease reviewed all the data and produced a consensus statement relating to the ureteroscopy and all the particularities around this procedure. CONCLUSION: This manuscript provides literatures and recommendations for endourologists to keep them informed in regard to the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative consideration in regard of a ureteroscopy.

First clinical evaluation of a new single-use flexible cystoscope dedicated to double-J stent removal (Isiris™): a European prospective multicenter study.

PURPOSE: We evaluated a new single-use digital flexible cystoscope with an integrated grasper designed for double-J stent removal, Isiris™, addressing success rate, image quality, deflection, maneuverability and grasper functionality. METHODS: In September 2015, a prospective cohort study was conducted in six tertiary European reference centers. All consecutive patients included underwent double-J stent removal and were 18 years or older. Success rate was defined by complete stent removal. Image quality, deflection, maneuverability and grasper functionality were rated with a Likert scale. RESULTS: A total of 83 procedures were performed. 82% of procedures were performed in the endoscopy room, while the others were in the operating room since a consecutive endourological intervention was planned. The median duration of stent implantation was 28 days [14; 60]. In five patients, stent removal was not possible. Four patients had an incrusted double-J stent, and in one patient, the stent migrated into the ureter. After unsuccessful attempts of stent removal with conventional flexible cystoscope and grasper, the five patients had to be scheduled for an ureterorenoscopy procedure to remove the stent. In the other 78 patients, all double-J stents were removed successfully. Image quality, deflection, maneuverability and grasper functionality were rated as "very good" in 72.3, 78.3, 72.3 and 73.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This multicenter clinical evaluation of Isiris™ displayed good image quality, active deflection, maneuverability and grasper functionality. Further evaluation of stent removal outcomes, cost analysis and microbiology will help to delineate the possible place of Isiris™ in the current practice.

First clinical evaluation of a new single-use flexible ureteroscope (LithoVue™): a European prospective multicentric feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated a new digital single-use flexible ureteroscope, LithoVue™ with respect to deflection, image quality and maneuverability. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in eight tertiary reference centers in Europe in December 2015 and January 2016. All consecutive patients included underwent flexible ureteroscopy and were 18 years or older. Deflection and image quality pre- and post-use and maneuverability were rated with a Likert scale. RESULTS: A total of 40 procedures were performed (five per institution). The indication for FURS was treatment of renal stones in 92.5 % of the cases. Before LithoVue™ usage, the median measured upward and downward deflections were both 270°. Image quality was rated as "very good" in 65 % of cases and "good" in 30 %. Maneuverability was "very good" in 77.5 % and "good" in 17.5 %. At the final evaluation, median upward and downward deflections were both 270°. Image quality was still "very good" in 65 % of cases and "good" in 30 % with no significant difference compared with preoperative data (p = 1). Maneuverability was "very good" in 72.5 % and "good" in 17.5 %, with no significant difference compared with preoperative data (p = 0.92). Two LithoVue™ broke during surgery (5 %): one occurring in extreme deflection with acute infundibulopelvic angle and spontaneous loss of vision for the second one. CONCLUSION: The LithoVue™ displayed good image quality, active deflection and maneuverability. Further evaluation of surgical outcomes and cost analysis will help to present the best utility of this single-use FURS in current practice.

Assessment of bilateral supine and prone tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the outcome of same-session bilateral tubeless percutaneous nephrolithotomy (BPCNL) in supine and prone positions and to compare them to unilateral tubeless PCNL (UPCNL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive PCNL patients treated at two institutions between 2006-2016 were analyzed. Tubeless BPCNL was performed when indicated. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients underwent BPCNLs [30 supine (SBPCNL) and 28 prone (PBPCNL)], while 1395 patients underwent UPCNLs. Demographics and baseline data were similar for all groups (p > 0.05). SBPCNL had a longer operating time (124 +/- 38 minutes versus 105 +/- 36 minutes; p = 0.49) and a significantly longer hospital stay (3.6 +/- 1.9 versus 2.4 +/- 1.3 days, respectively; p = 0.019) in comparison to PBPCNL. Seven planned BPCNLs were converted to UPCNL, resulting in a BPCNL success rate of 58/65 (89%). When compared to UPCNL, BPCNL patients had a significantly increased postoperative creatinine level (0.74 +/- 0.3 versus -0.04 +/- 0.8 g/dL; p = 0.07E-7), a decreased postoperative hemoglobin level (2 +/- 1.1 versus 1.4 +/- 1.7 mg/dL; p = 0.026), a higher blood transfusion rate (9% versus 2%; p = 0.023), and a longer hospital stay (3 +/- 1.7 versus 1.6 +/- 1.7 days; p = 0.001E-4). Stone-free and overall complication rates were similar for both groups. CONCLUSION: BPCNL can be routinely offered to patients with a bilateral indication. BPCNL is associated with higher blood transfusion rates and longer hospital stays, but it may spare patients from repeat anesthesia and hospitalization. SBPCNL takes longer to perform than PBCNL, but without clinical ramifications.

Upper Calyx Approachability through a Lower Calyx Access for Prone Versus Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.

PURPOSE: We assessed the approachability of the upper calyx through lower calyx access for prone and supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy and used computerized tomography to analyze anatomical factors that may influence it. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective series of 45 patients treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy were operated on in the prone (20) and supine (25) positions. Computerized tomography simulated access to the lower and upper calyx longitudinal axes were used to measure skin-to-lower calyx distance, thickness of the body wall, muscle and fat, the muscle-to-fat thickness ratio and the angle between the lower calyx tract and the upper calyx axis. Intraoperative approachability to the upper calyx was also evaluated. RESULTS: The upper calyx was successfully approached in 20% of prone and 80% of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomies (p <0.0001). The average skin-to-lower calyx distance was 98.4 mm (range 65.3 to 128.6) in the prone position and 98.7 mm (range 60.8 to 150) in the supine position (p = 0.99). Body wall and muscular thickness, and the muscle-to-fat thickness ratio were significantly lower in supine than prone nephrolithotomy (p <0.001, <0.0005 and <0.05, respectively). The average angle between the lower and upper calyces axes was wide in the supine position (141 degrees, range 90 to 170) and acute in the prone position (84 degrees, range 65 to 110, p <0.05(E-10)). CONCLUSIONS: Upper calyx endoscopic approachability through the lower calyx is significantly higher in supine than in prone percutaneous nephrolithotomies, possibly due to a thinner body wall, a thinner muscular layer, a lower muscle-to-fat thickness ratio and a wider angle between the lower and upper calyx axes.

Mortality and flexible ureteroscopy: analysis of six cases.

PURPOSE: Advancements in the endourological equipment have made retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) an attractive, widespread technique, capable of competing with traditional shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Since the complication rate is generally low, even less is known about dramatic and fatal complications after RIRS. METHODS: We performed a survey asking 11 experienced endourologists to review their RIRS series and report the cases of mortality to their best knowledge. RESULTS: Six urologists reported on six fatal cases. In three cases, a history of urinary tract infections was present. Four patients died from urosepsis, one due to an anesthetic and one due to hemorrhagic complication. The use of ureteral access sheath was not common. CONCLUSION: Even respecting the standards of care, it may happen that physicians are occasionally tempted to overdo for their patients, sometimes skipping safety rules with an inevitable increase in risks. Despite the fact that RIRS has become a viable option for the treatment of the majority of kidney stones, its complication rates remain low. Nevertheless, rare fatal events may occur, especially in complex cases with a history of urinary tract infections, and advanced neurological diseases.