Retrograde intrarenal surgery with or without ureteral access sheath: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: The ureteral access sheath (UAS) is a medical device that enables repeated entrance into the ureter and collecting system during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Its impact on stone-free rates, ureteral injuries, operative time, and postoperative complications remains controversial. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing RIRS with versus without UAS for urolithiasis management. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes from retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for stone extraction with or without ureteral access sheath (UAS); evaluating stone-free rate (SFR), ureteral injuries, operative time, and postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in June 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety outcomes of UAS use in RIRS for urolithiasis treatment. Articles published between 2014 and 2024 were included. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) were calculated for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: Five RCTs comprising 466 procedures were included. Of these, 246 (52.7%) utilized UAS. The follow-up ranged from 1 week to 1 month. UAS reduced the incidence of postoperative fever (RR 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.84; p=0.009), and postoperative infection (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.30-0.83; p=0.008). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of SFR (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.99-1.11; p=0.10), ureteral injuries (RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.95-1.75; p=0.11), operative time (MD 3.56 minutes; 95% CI -4.15 to 11.27 minutes; p=0.36), or length of stay (MD 0.32 days; 95% CI -0.42 to 1.07 days; p=0.40). CONCLUSION: UAS leads to a lower rate of post-operative fever and infection. However, UAS did not significantly reduce or increase the SFR or the rate of ureteral injuries during RIRS for patients with urolithiasis. The use of UAS should be considered to decrease the risk of infectious complications, particularly in those who may be at higher risk for such complications.

Carvedilol as secondary prophylaxis for variceal bleeding in hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

BACKGROUND: Upper variceal bleeding (UVB) is a possible complication of portal hypertension secondary to hepatosplenic schistosomiasis (HSS). Propranolol is a non-selective beta-blocker used as secondary prophylaxis for UVB, but no previous studies have addressed carvedilol effects in rebleeding prevention. METHODS: A retrospective exploratory study of 57 patients with chronic HSS and index UVB treated with endoscopic variceal ligation and propranolol or carvedilol was conducted. The primary outcome was UVB-free time in the first 12 mo after the initial bleeding episode. RESULTS: Propranolol was used for secondary UVB prophylaxis in 43 (75.4%) participants (median dose 80 [interquartile range - IQR 60-80] mg/d) and carvedilol in 14 (24.6%) participants (median dose 12.5 [IQR 7.9-25.0] mg/d). During a 12-mo follow-up, rebleeding was observed in 13 (22.8%) patients, 9 (20.9%) of those treated with propranolol and 4 (28.6%) treated with carvedilol (p=0.715). Mean time from the beginning of drug prophylaxis to rebleeding was 6±3 mo and there was no difference between that for propranolol vs carvedilol subgroups. Portal vein thrombosis did not influence the bleeding recurrence in either subgroup. CONCLUSION: Carvedilol may be equally effective as propranolol in preventing secondary UVB in HSS at 12-mo follow-up.