Global Assessment of Urological Endoscopic Skills (GAUES): development and validation of a novel assessment tool to evaluate endourological skills.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate an assessment tool for endourological skills during simulation including cystoscopy, ureteroscopy (URS) and transurethral resection (TUR) procedures. METHODS: We designed a Global Assessment of Urological Endoscopic Skills (GAUES) tool, comprised of nine endourology task-specific and two global-rating skills items. The tool was developed through two rounds of the Delphi process. The GAUES tool was used to assess acquisition of URS and TUR skills of novices (Year 2 core surgical trainees, CT2) and intermediate level trainees (residents at the start of the UK higher surgical training programme in Urology, Speciality Trainee Year 3, ST3) at the Urology Simulation Boot Camp (USBC) between 2016 and 2018. Validity was evaluated by comparing scores between trainees with different levels of urological experience. Inter-rater reliability was also assessed. RESULTS: We evaluated 130 residents, 52% of trainees were at an intermediate stage of training and 39% were novices. In all, 9% of the anonymous forms were missing demographics. The completion rate of the GAUES tool during the USBC for URS and TUR was 85% and 89%, respectively. Our analysis demonstrated a significant difference in all domains between intermediates and novices at assessment in URS, except for one domain more suited to clinical assessment (P = 0.226). There was excellent intraclass correlation (ICC) overall between the two experts' judgements, ICC = 0.841 (95% confidence interval 0.767-0.893; P < 0.001, n = 88). CONCLUSIONS: We have developed the novel GAUES tool for cystoscopic, URS and TUR skills. Overall, we demonstrated good face, content and construct validity and excellent reliability, suggesting that the GAUES tool can be useful for endourological skills assessment.

Prospective evaluation and classification of endoscopic findings for ureteral calculi.

Difficulty in performing ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) depends on endoscopic findings surrounding calculi. In this multicentre prospective cohort study of 185 patients with a single ureteral stone who underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy registered in the SMART study between January 2014 and February 2017, we established a classification of endoscopic findings and analysed risk factors for ureteral changes. We evaluated endoscopic findings (oedema, polyps, ureteral mucosa-stone adherence, and distal ureteric tightness) based on the SMART classification. Operative time and ureteral injuries were significantly correlated with endoscopic finding grades. Multivariate analyses revealed that mucosa-stone adherence (MSA) was strongly affected by hydronephrosis grade (odds ratio, 12.4; p = 0.022) and the interval before surgery (odds ratio, 1.10; p = 0.012). The cutoff value for MSA was 98 days, with a predictive accuracy of 0.78. Risk factors for distal ureteric tightness were age (odds ratio, 0.96; p = 0.004) and early intervention (odds ratio, 0.90; p = 0.023). The cutoff value was 34 days, with a predictive accuracy of 0.72. In conclusion, appropriate intervention around 34 days (limited to 98 days) after symptom onset is necessary for treating ureteral calculi. Even if intervention passed 98 days post-symptom onset, staged URSL, alternative procedures, and detailed informed consent should be planned in advance, assuming strong MSA.

Performance Optimization Strategies for Complex Endourologic Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and address factors that may impact a surgeon's performance during endourologic procedures. METHODS: A literature review was performed for articles focusing on surgical ergonomics, education, sports and performance psychology. RESULTS: As urologists and trainees have become more comfortable approaching complex pathology endoscopically, there remains an opportunity to refine surgeon-related factors and optimize extrinsic factors to maximize efficiency and provide patients with the highest quality outcomes and safety. CONCLUSION: Medical centers and training programs should strive to include formal lessons on stress-coping mechanisms, communication, and dedicated ergonomic training, as these all play a role in physician well-being and may lead to improved clinical outcomes.

Flexible ureteroscopy: reuse? Or is single use the new direction?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Single-use flexible ureteroscopes (su-fURS) aim at overcoming the main limitations of conventional reusable ureteroscopes in terms of acquisition and maintenance costs, breakages, and reprocessing. However, little data exist to date regarding the superiority of su-fURS at this regard. We aimed to perform a systematic literature review on available su-fURS performance with a focus on clinical data for all articles in the last 10 years. RECENT FINDINGS: To date, more than 10 different su-fURS are available on the market, with different characteristics and performance. Some of these devices have top-level features, almost catching up with those observed in reusable flexible ureteroscopes. Clinical evidence is mainly available only for two models, LithoVue and Uscope PU3022, and to date it is not strong enough to support routine adoption and use of su-fURS, with a consequent lack of consensus of specific clinical indications. Cost-effectiveness analyses seem to indicate an economic disadvantage in the routine adoption of su-fURS. Environmental issues related to the use of su-fURS also remain to be inquired and addressed. SUMMARY: Since their introduction, su-fURS have gained widespread popularity. Despite their ability at addressing reusable ureteroscope limitations, high-cost and a substantial lack of evidence are still limiting their routine adoption.

[Update of the 2Sk guidelines on the diagnostics, treatment and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF register number 043-025) : What is new?] / Aktualisierung der S2k-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik, Therapie und Metaphylaxe der Urolithiasis (AWMF Registernummer 043-025) : Was ist neu?

The increase of medical knowledge and technical innovations together with the demographic change represent a challenge for the new conception of guidelines and clinical studies. The present S2k guidelines, which are exclusively concerned with kidney and ureteral stones, should support the treatment of urolithiasis in hospitals and private practices and provide information on urolithiasis for patients. Increasing interdisciplinary collaboration in stone treatment is also demonstrated in the number of professional and working groups participating in the update of the new guidelines. The present S2k guidelines emerged from a consensus process and demonstrate the current recommendations in step with actual practice. They provide decision-making guidance for diagnostics, treatment and metaphylactic measures based on expert opinions and available published fundamental evidence from the literature.

Single use versus reusable digital flexible ureteroscopes: A prospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the performance and surgical outcomes of two different single-use digital flexible ureteroscopes with a reusable video flexible ureteroscope. METHODS: Patients undergoing retrograde flexible ureteroscopy at Nepean Hospital, Sydney, Australia, were included in this study. Three different flexible ureteroscopes were used in this study: (i) single-use digital LithoVue (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA); (ii) single-use digital PU3022A (Pusen, Zhuhai, China); and (iii) reusable digital URF-V2 (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Visibility and maneuverability was rated on a 5-point Likert scale by the operating surgeon. Operative outcomes and complications were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients were included in the present study. Of these, 141 patients had ureteroscopy for stone treatment, four for endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery and five for diagnostic/tumor treatment. There were 55 patients in the LithoVue group, 31 in the PU3022A group and 64 patients in the Olympus URF-V2 group. The URF-V2 group had higher visibility scores than both the single-use scopes and higher maneuverability scores when compared with the PU3022A. The LithoVue had higher visibility and maneuverability scores when compared with the PU3022A. There were no differences in operative time, rates of relook flexible ureteroscopes, scope failure or complication rates observed. CONCLUSIONS: Single-use digital flexible ureteroscopes have visibility and maneuverability profiles approaching that of a reusable digital flexible ureteroscope. Single-use flexible ureteroscopes achieve similar clinical outcomes to the more expensive reusable versions.

The effect of repeated full immersion simulation training in ureterorenoscopy on mental workload of novice operators.

BACKGROUND: Difficult surgical procedures may result in a higher mental workload, leading to increased fatigue and subsequent errors. This study was aimed to investigate the effect of repeated simulation training in ureterorenoscopy in a high-fidelity setting on the performance and mental workload of novice operators. METHODS: Medical students voluntarily participated in the present simulation study. After a didactic and video-based lecture, they underwent simulation training involving a renal stone case, including a rigid cystoscope component (task 1, performing a WHO checklist, assembling a scope, and insertion of a guide-wire and an access sheath after examining the bladder) and a flexible ureterorenoscope component (task 2, retrieving a stone located in the upper calyx using a basket after inspecting the upper, middle, and lower calyx). Training was performed in a mock operating theater. Technical skills were assessed by one author (an experienced urologist) onsite using an Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) score at each training session. The mental workload was subjectively evaluated by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA-TLX) questionnaire after each training session. RESULTS: Seventeen students completed a minimum of 6 training sessions (male: female = 10: 7, median age of 22) over a median of 21 days (range, 10-32). In both tasks 1 and 2, the OSATS score improved over the 6 sessions with evidence of plateauing (MANOVA model, task 1: p < 0.0001, task 2: p < 0.0001). In contrast, the NASA-TLX score persistently decreased without plateauing (task 1: p = 0.0005, task 2: p = 0.0028). CONCLUSIONS: Under repeated simulation training in ureterorenoscopy in a high-fidelity setting, participants showed a continual decrease of the mental workload, while the improvement of technical skills reached a plateau over the 6 sessions. Our study showed the important benefit of simulation training to reduce the mental workload by repeated scenario training before actual clinical practice.

Practice patterns of ureteral access sheath during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis: a survey among endourologists worldwide.

BACKGROUND: The use of ureteral access sheath (UAS) during ureteroscopy is controversial. We aimed to explore practice patterns of UAS during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis among endourologists worldwide. METHODS: A 15-question survey was designed using the SurveyMonkey® platform. The questions covered the background and professional experience of the potential respondents, indications for UAS insertion, UAS caliber and possible complications associated with its use. The questions were anonymously tabulated in order to determine practice patterns of UAS during ureteroscopy for nephrolithiasis among endourologists. The survey was then distributed via e-mail to all the Endourological Society members. RESULTS: 216 members responded. 99.53% of the respondents practice as endourologists, 63.4% are fellowship trained and 74.4% are at least 6 years post-fellow. 73.2% practice in an academic facility. 77.3% perform at least 100 ureteroscopies annually. 46 and 76% routinely use UAS for the treatment of ureteral and kidney stones, respectively. In both cases, the 12/14 access sheath is the most common. 42% use UAS in primary ureteroscopy. 90.3% believe that a double J stent insertion is not mandatory prior to UAS insertion. 79.1% think the use of UAS does not increase postoperative complications rate, and if the latter does encounter, then most likely it is either a ureteral stricture (93.2%) or pain (48%). CONCLUSIONS: UAS is commonly used by highly skilled endourologists during ureteroscopy. 12/14 UAS is mostly used. Ureteral stricture and post-operative pain are proposed as possible complications following UAS introduction, however pre-stenting is not mandatory as overall low complication rate is expected.

Risk Factors for Ureteral Damage in Ureteroscopic stone Treatment: Results of the German Prospective Multicentre Benchmarks of Ureterorenoscopic Stone Treatment-Results in Terms of Complications, Quality of Life, and Stone-Free Rates Project.

BACKGROUND: The Post-Ureteroscopic Lesion Scale (PULS) is a validated, standardised scale that classifies iatrogenic ureteral lesions during ureteroscopy (URS). OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for the various PULS-grades caused by URS. METHOD: We prospectively investigated the independent influence of various risk factors in correlation with PULS-Grade 1+ and 2+ on 307 patients with ureterorenoscopic stone treatment from 14 German urologic departments. RESULTS: The following are the outcomes of the study: 117 (38.4%) and 188 (61.6%) of the calculi (median stone size 6 mm) were found in the kidney or ureter; 70% and 82.4% underwent preoperative or postoperative ureteral stenting; 44.3 and 7.2% received laser or ballistic lithotripsy; 60% of the patients presented with PULS grade 1+ and 8% with PULS grade of 2+. Only intracorporal lithotripsy revealed a significant independent risk factor for PULS grade 1+ or 2+. Both laser and ballistic therapies raised the probability of PULS grade 1+ by the factors 3.6 (p < 0.001) and 3.9 (p = 0.021), respectively. The ORs in conjunction with PULS grade 2+ were 3.1 (p = 0.038) and 5.8 (p = 0.014) respectively. Neither endpoint exhibited a significant difference regarding the lithotripsic procedure (laser vs. ballistic). CONCLUSION: Intracorporal lithotripsy is associated with a significant increase in damage to the ureter; further research is needed to determine its long-term effects.

[Result of treatment of urinary lithiasis for professional aptitude]. / Traitement de la lithiase urinaire pour aptitude professionnelle : résultats de la prise en charge par urétéroscopie dans une population militaire.

INTRODUCTION: Military people are inapt for presence of urinary stones. In this specific population, the treatment of stones is even more aggressive than for the general population without recommendation. The final decision about aptitude is the responsibility of the military doctor. Whereas, ureteroscopy has its place there and must done by any urologist. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to estimate the results of treatments by ureteroscopy in this population. Success was defined by the complete absence of fragment visualized in the imaging of control operating comment and so the end of the inaptitude time. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2016, forty-two were treated for ureteral or renal calculi. The population comprises of 93% men, 35 years old on average. The stones were mainly multiple (more 2) and the medium size is 5mm; sixteen (42.9%) was at the left and eight (19%) was bilateral. In 78.8% (78) of the cases there was a stone in renal position whose 50% (39) still at the lower calyx. In total, 5% of the patients were stone-free in 2 sessions on average. The average deadline of inaptitude of the initial consultation in the resumption of work was of 6 months. In 4% of the cases there was a complication operating rank 4. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the feasibility, the weak harmlessness of ureteroscopy and the lesser deadline of inaptitude. Every urologist can treat this specific population. The patient must be informed and accept the treatment because of excluding referential. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

European Association of Urology Section of Urolithiasis (EULIS) Consensus Statement on Simulation, Training, and Assessment in Urolithiasis.

BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training offers an acceptable adjunct to the traditional mentor-apprentice model in helping trainees to traverse the early stages of the learning curve for ureteroscopy and percutaneous renal surgery. In addition, nontechnical skills are increasingly important in preventing adverse events in the operating room, and simulation-based training can be used for training in such skills. Incorporation of simulation into formalised, standardised, and validated curricula offers an applicable method for training residents. OBJECTIVE: To develop a curriculum for urolithiasis procedures incorporating technical and nontechnical skills training for implementation across Europe. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An international panel of experts from EULIS, EUREP, ESU and ESUT was consulted in five stages. The study incorporated a mix of qualitative and quantitative data for collection and analysis. Responses were drawn out in (1) an opinion survey and (2) a curriculum development survey, which were discussed in (3) a focus group meeting. Group responses from this meeting were analysed for themes, which were discussed at (4) a focus group meeting, where consensus was reached among the group. Data analysis and integration at this stage were used to draft the curriculum. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: All group meetings were transcribed from the focus group discussion. Eight themes were generated, into which all data were categorised. These were: need for a training curriculum; curriculum objectives; curriculum structure; curriculum content; teaching platforms and tools; assessment and certification; validation and implementation; and global integration of the curriculum. A curriculum, including recommended simulators for use, was subsequently proposed. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a comprehensive curriculum for training in urolithiasis. Additional planning is required for full validation and implementation before it can be used to train residents. PATIENT SUMMARY: Stone disease accounts for a major proportion of surgical interventions worldwide. We describe a consensus guideline for effective training of stone surgeons.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of URSL, RPLU, and MPCNL for treatment of large upper impacted ureteral stones: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are three minimally invasive methods for the management of large upper impacted ureteral stones: mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MPCNL), transurethral ureteroscope lithotripsy (URSL), and retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RPLU). This study aimed to compare MPCNL, URSL, and RPLU, and to evaluate which one is the best choice for large upper impacted ureteral stones. METHODS: Between January 2012 and December 2015, at the Department of Urology, Huai'an First People's Hospital, 150 consecutively enrolled patients with a large upper impacted ureteral stone (>15 mm) were included. The patients were randomly divided (1:1:1) into the MPCNL, URSL, and RPLU groups. The primary endpoint was success of stone removal measured 1 month postoperatively and the secondary endpoints were intraoperative and postoperative parameters and complications. RESULTS: Fifteen patients needed auxiliary ESWL after URSL, and 3 patients after MPCNL, but none after RPLU. The stone clearance rate was 96% (48/50) in the MPCNL group and 72% (33/46) in the URSL group. In the RPLU group the stones were completely removed and the stone clearance rate was 100% (48/48) (P = 0.021 vs. URSL; P = 0.083 vs. MPCNL). Operation-related complications were similar among the three groups (all P > 0.05). Hospital stay was shorter in the URSL group compared with MPCNL (P = 0.003). Operation time was the shortest with URSL and the longest with MPCNL (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: MPCNL and RPUL are more suitable for upper ureteral impacted stones of >15 mm. URSL could be considered if the patient is not suitable for general anesthesia, or the patient requests transurethral uretroscopic surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration number: ChiCTR-INR-17011507 ; Registration date: 2017-5-22).

[Individualized evidence-based interventional stone treatment : One stone, many question marks?] / Individualisierte evidenzbasierte interventionelle Steintherapie : Ein Stein, viele Fragezeichen?

The treatment of urolithiasis is still one of the most frequent tasks in the daily urological practice. Driven by the technological developments, patient demands and also personal experiences of urologists, many interventional treatment options have been established. To identify the most suitable treatment option, it is of utmost importance to consider not only stone size and localization but also the individual situation of the patient and the published evidence, which despite all efforts often lags behind the technical and clinical reality.

[S2k guidelines on diagnostics, therapy and metaphylaxis of urolithiasis (AWMF 043/025) : Compendium]. / S2k-Leitlinie zur Diagnostik, Therapie und Metaphylaxe der Urolithiasis (AWMF 043/025) : Kurzfassung.

Every tenth German citizen will suffer from at least one urinary calculus during the lifetime. The diagnostics, treatment and follow-up treatment of urolithiasis are, therefore, part of the daily routine practice for all urologists in hospitals and private practices as well as in many other disciplines, such as general practitioners, internists, nephrologists and pediatricians. Although the diagnostics and therapy have experienced substantial alterations over the last 10 years, the possibilities of metabolic diagnostics and secondary prevention for patients at risk are, unfortunately and unjustly, in many places very poorly represented. The present S2k guidelines, which for the first time were established in an interdisciplinary consensus process, represent the current practical recommendations and, whenever possible, use tables and algorithms in order to facilitate easy reference in the routine daily work. Last but not least, this greatly simplifies the measures for metaphylaxis.

Current Standard Technique for Modern Flexible Ureteroscopy: Tips and Tricks.

BACKGROUND: Thanks to advancements in the endoscopic armamentarium, flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) has become a viable and attractive option for the treatment of renal stones because of its high stone-free rates (SFRs) and low morbidity. OBJECTIVE: To describe our surgical technique for fURS, step-by-step, for the treatment of renal stones and to assess its effectiveness and safety. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A retrospective analysis of 316 consecutive patients who underwent fURS for renal stones at our institution between March 2014 and September 2015 was performed. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy using a standardized technique with last-generation flexible ureteroscopes. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Clinical data were collected in a dedicated database. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were assessed. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The mean overall stone size was 16.5 ± 7.9mm. Ureteral access sheath placement was possible in 287 patients (90.8%). At 1-mo follow-up, the overall primary SFR was 79.1%; the secondary and tertiary SFRs were 89.5% and 91.5%, respectively. The mean operative time was 72.6 ± 27.5min. The mean number of procedures was 1.27. Complications were reported in 92 patients (29.1%) overall, with Clavien grade 1 in 55 patients (17.4%), grade 2 in 30 patients (9.5%), grade 3 in 6 patients (1.9%), grade 4 in 1 patient (0.3%), and grade 5 in none. The main limitation of the study was the retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: The fURS procedure is safe and effective for the treatment of renal stones. A staged procedure is necessary to achieve stone-free status with large calculi. PATIENT SUMMARY: Flexible ureteroscopy is an effective treatment with low complication rates for the majority of renal stones. Both the modern highly technological armamentarium and surgical know-how should be available.

EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis.

CONTEXT: Management of urinary stones is a major issue for most urologists. Treatment modalities are minimally invasive and include extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), ureteroscopy (URS), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). Technological advances and changing treatment patterns have had an impact on current treatment recommendations, which have clearly shifted towards endourologic procedures. These guidelines describe recent recommendations on treatment indications and the choice of modality for ureteral and renal calculi. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the optimal measures for treatment of urinary stone disease. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Several databases were searched to identify studies on interventional treatment of urolithiasis, with special attention to the level of evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Treatment decisions are made individually according to stone size, location, and (if known) composition, as well as patient preference and local expertise. Treatment recommendations have shifted to endourologic procedures such as URS and PNL, and SWL has lost its place as the first-line modality for many indications despite its proven efficacy. Open and laparoscopic techniques are restricted to limited indications. Best clinical practice standards have been established for all treatments, making all options minimally invasive with low complication rates. CONCLUSION: Active treatment of urolithiasis is currently a minimally invasive intervention, with preference for endourologic techniques. PATIENT SUMMARY: For active removal of stones from the kidney or ureter, technological advances have made it possible to use less invasive surgical techniques. These interventions are safe and are generally associated with shorter recovery times and less discomfort for the patient.

Flexible Ureterorenoscopy for Treatment of Kidney Stones: Establishment as Primary Standard Therapy in a Tertiary Stone Center.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze the primary stone free rate (pSFR) of flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS) in the treatment of renal stones and to identify clinical predictors for the primary freedom from renal stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and seventy five patients, who underwent fURS for kidney stones were analyzed. RESULTS: Index stone size was 6 mm. The stone was located in the lower calyx in 48%. Ureteral access sheath was used in 97%. Operation time was 35 min and primary stone clearance was 83%. pSFR increased from 74% in 2012 to 83% in 2013 and 90% in 2014 (p = 0.001). Preoperative stenting, index stone size, cumulative stone size, lithotripsy, ureteral access sheath and operation time were significantly correlated with the pSFR by univariate analysis. Multivariate regression analysis showed index stone size, cumulative stone size, ureteral access sheath and operation time as independent parameters for pSFR. CONCLUSIONS: fURS for kidney stones is safe with a high pSFR. Clinical parameters for pSFR are stone size, use of ureteral access sheath and operation time. In future, the effective use of fURS for the removal of kidney stones needs to be checked by prospective randomized trials.

Ureteroscopia para el tratamiento de la litiasis. Pasado, presente y futuro / Ureteroscopy for the treatment of urinary stones. Past, present and future

OBJETIVO: La ureteroscopia ha constituido una de las técnicas más revolucionarias de la urología moderna para el tratamiento de la litiasis urinaria. El desarrollo de nuevos ureteroscopios, de las diferentes técnicas auxiliares, así como de los métodos de fragmentación han sido las causas de esta evolución. Describir la evolución de los sistemas de imagen, las técnicas auxiliares para el manejo de los cálculos, así como los métodos de fragmentación desde sus inicios a nuestros días, poniendo especial énfasis en las diferentes tendencias relativas a la técnica que nos deparará el futuro próximo. MÉTODOS: Se realiza una revisión bibliográfica destacando el desarrollo de los detalles técnicos, así como el impacto sobre los resultados en términos de tasa libre de litiasis, y desarrollo de complicaciones. CONCLUSIONES: La ureteroscopia ha evolucionado hasta convertirse actualmente en una técnica de primera línea para el tratamiento de la litiasis del tracto urinario superior. Los avances tecnológicos producidos tanto en los equipos de imagen como en las diferentes técnicas auxiliares y en los métodos de fragmentación han permitido la mejora de las tasas libres de litiasis y han disminuido la morbilidad de la técnica. Las mejoras en los sistemas de imagen, los instrumentos auxiliares y los métodos de fragmentación permitirán progresivamente el tratamiento de litiasis más complejas del tracto urinario superior

OBJECTIVES: Ureteroscopy has been considered one of the most revolutionary techniques in modern urology for the treatment of urinary stones. The developments of new ureteroscopes, ancillary techniques or fragmentation devices have contributed to that evolution. To describe the evolution of imaging systems, auxiliary techniques and fragmentation methods for treatment of urinary stones from its beginnings to present time, with special emphasis on the different trends in the technique for the nearest future. METHODS: A bibliographic review is performed highlighting the development of technical details, and the impact on the results in terms of stone-free rate, and complications. CONCLUSIONS: Ureteroscopy has evolved into a first-line technique for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones. Technological advances in both imaging equipment and on different ancillary techniques and fragmentation methods have enabled improved stone free rates and decreased morbidity of the technique. Improvements in imaging systems, auxiliary instruments and fragmentation methods allow the treatment of stones progressively more complex

Impact of case volume on outcomes of ureteroscopy for ureteral stones: the clinical research office of the endourological society ureteroscopy global study.

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society (CROES) undertook the Ureteroscopy Global Study to establish a prospective global database to examine the worldwide use of ureteroscopy (URS) and to determine factors affecting outcome. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of case volume on the outcomes of URS for ureteral stones. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The URS Global Study collected prospective data on consecutive patients with urinary stones treated with URS at 114 centres worldwide for 1 yr. Centres were identified as low or high volume based on the median overall annual case volume. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Pre- and intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes in patients at low- and high-volume centres were compared. The relationships between case volume and stone-free rate (SFR), stone burden, complications, and hospital stay were explored using multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Across all centres, the median case volume was 67; 58 and 56 centres were designated as low volume and high volume, respectively. URS procedures at high-volume centres took significantly less time to conduct. Mean SFR was 91.9% and 86.3% at high- and low-volume centres, respectively (p<0.001); the adjusted probability of a stone-free outcome increased with increasing case volume (p<0.001). Patients treated at a high-volume centre were less likely to need retreatment, had shorter postoperative hospital stay, were less likely to be readmitted within 3 mo, and had fewer and less severe complications. At case volumes approximately >200, the probability of complications decreased with increasing case volume (p=0.02). The study is limited by the heterogeneity of participating centres and surgeons and the inclusion of patients treated by more than one approach. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of ureteral stones with URS, high-volume centres achieve better outcomes than low-volume centres. Several outcome measures for URS improve with an increase in case volume. PATIENT SUMMARY: Outcomes following treatment of ureteral stones by ureteroscopy (URS) were studied in a large group of patients at centres worldwide. The proportion of successful procedures (ie, those in which patients became stone free) increased as the annual volume of URS at a hospital increased. Hospital stays were shorter and postoperative complications were less likely at high-volume hospitals. We conclude that for URS, the best outcomes are seen in patients treated at high-volume hospitals.

Desarrollo de un checklist de tareas específicas para el procedimiento ureterolitotomía endoscópica / Development of a task-specific checklist for endoscopic reterolithotomy

En el último tiempo, en la urología, ha ganado terreno la cirugía endoluminal que es menos invasiva pero técnicamente más compleja que la cirugía abierta. Esto sumado a la menor exposición a procedimientos prácticos de los residentes ha puesto la alerta en la necesidad de establecer mecanismos de evaluación objetivos de las competencias técnicas para garantizar la seguridad de los pacientes. El objetivo de nuestro trabajo fue desarrollar un checklist de tareas específicas para la evaluación del procedimiento ureterolitotomía endoscópica. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Para el desarrollo del checklist se utilizó el método de Delphi modificado que busca consenso entre expertos a través de la evaluación y revisión sucesiva de un formulario y el análisis estadístico de las respuestas. RESULTADOS: Con la participación de ocho urólogos expertos en procedimientos endourológicos de distintas instituciones del país se obtuvo un checklist de 23 ítems para el procedimiento ureterolitotomía endoscópica. CONCLUSIÓN: Se describe y presenta el desarrollo de un checklist de tareas específicas para el procedimiento ureterolitotomía endoscópica que permitirá la evaluación de residentes tanto en el laboratorio de simulación como en el pabellón quirúrgico.

In the last years, endoluminal surgery, a less invasive but technically more complex procedure, has gained ground in urology over open surgery. The reduction on exposure to practical procedures of residents has added an alert on the need to establish a mechanism for objective assessment of technical skills to ensure patients safety. The aim of this study was develop a tasks-specific checklist in order to assess resident performing endoscopic ureterolithotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The modified Delphi method was used for the development of the checklist. This technic tries to find a consensus among experts through the evaluation and subsequent revision of a questionnaire and the statistical analysis of the responses. RESULTS: Eight endourologists procedures experts from different institutions of the country participate on this study helping to develop a 23-item checklist for ureterolithotomy endoscopic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: We describe and present the development of a tasks-specific checklist for ureterolithotomy endoscopic that will allow the evaluation of residents in both simulation laboratory and surgical ward.