Comparing Same-Sitting Bilateral vs Unilateral Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in the Elderly.

OBJECTIVE: To compare same-sitting bilateral vs unilateral retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in elderly patients, focusing on postoperative complications and stone-free rates (SFR). METHODS: Data from 2 multicenter databases, FLEXible ureteroscopy Outcomes Registry (FLEXOR) (unilateral RIRS) and same sitting bilateral-retrograde intrarenal surgery (SSB-RIRS) (bilateral RIRS), were analyzed, considering only patients aged 70+ with preoperative computed tomography. Patients were categorized into Group 1 (bilateral RIRS) and Group 2 (unilateral RIRS). Follow-up included imaging assessments and secondary treatments as needed. RESULTS: Group 1 included 146 patients, while group 2 had 495. Group 1's patients were slightly older and had a higher prevalence of recurrent stone formation. Group 2 often underwent RIRS for incidental stones. Group 1 had larger and more pelvic stones. Laser lithotripsy and total operation times were significantly longer in Group 1. Group 2 had significantly higher overall stone-free rates, although there were no significant differences in ancillary procedures for residual fragments. Group 1 experienced more pelvicalyceal injuries needing stenting, postoperative fever, and post-op hematuria not requiring transfusion. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, bilateral RIRS can be carefully considered in elderly patients. Preoperative counseling is essential for both primary and repeat RIRS procedures, and further research is needed to optimize instrument and laser strategies for better outcomes in elderly RIRS patients.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Fluoroless Ureteroscopy and Conventional Ureteroscopy in the Management of Ureteral and Renal Stones.

Context: Stone recurrence is frequent in stone formers, and repeated diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in recurrent stone formers place patients and urologists at a significant risk of radiation-related effects. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of fluoroless ureteroscopy (fURS) compared with conventional ureteroscopy (cURS) in the management of ureteral and renal stones. Evidence Acquisition: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies providing data on the stone-free rate (SFR), secondary procedures, operative time (OT), and complication rate for fURS and cURS were included. An overall analysis and a subgroup analysis based on the stone target (ureteral stones, renal stones, or a combination thereof) were performed. Evidence Synthesis: A total of 23 studies were included, recruiting 4029 patients. Pooled data showed that in comparison with cURS, fURS exhibited a similar SFR (odds ratio [OR]: 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92 to 1.06; p = 0.709), without significant differences in overall intraoperative complication rate (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.63; p = 0.446), overall postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.63; p = 0.949), major postoperative complication rate (Clavien ≥3; OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.14 to 1.53; p = 0.205), OT (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.07; 95% CI: -0.15 to 0.29; p = 0.537), hospital stay (SMD: -0.12; 95% CI: -0.26 to 0.02; p = 0.084), or secondary procedures (OR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.58 to 2.49; p = 0.616). The subgroup analysis revealed no differences in outcomes according to the stone target. We also identified a rate of conversion to the conventional technique of 5% (95% CI: 3% to 7%). Conclusions: The available data suggest that for the treatment of ureteral and renal stones, fURS offers a similar SFR to that provided by the cURS without any increase in complication rate, OT, hospital stay, or secondary procedures. Critical review of the dogmatic routine use of fluoroscopy during ureteroscopy may be warranted.