Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review
Pissaia, Tamires Battistini; Belkovsky, Mikhael; Passerotti, Carlo Camargo; Artifon, Everton Luiz de Almeida; Otoch, Jose Pinhata; Cruz, José Arnaldo Shiomi da.
Affiliation
  • Pissaia, Tamires Battistini; Universidade Nove de Julho. Urology Department. São Paulo. BR
  • Belkovsky, Mikhael; Universidade de São Paulo. Medical School. Surgical Technique Department. São Paulo. BR
  • Passerotti, Carlo Camargo; Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz. Prostate Institute. Urology Department. São Paulo. BR
  • Artifon, Everton Luiz de Almeida; Universidade de São Paulo. Medical School. Surgical Technique Department. São Paulo. BR
  • Otoch, Jose Pinhata; Universidade de São Paulo. Medical School. Surgical Technique Department. São Paulo. BR
  • Cruz, José Arnaldo Shiomi da; Universidade Nove de Julho. Urology Department. São Paulo. BR
Acta cir. bras ; 38: e387423, 2023. tab, graf, ilus
Article in En | LILACS, VETINDEX | ID: biblio-1519875
Responsible library: BR68.1
Localization: BR68.1
ABSTRACT

Purpose:

Ureteral access sheaths (UAS) are widely used in ureteroscopy. UAS are believed to pose a significant risk for ureteral stenosis due to ureteral mucosal compression, but little evidence supports this claim. Our systematic review aimed to investigate the relationship between different UAS diameters and stenosis risk.

Methods:

A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane, from its inception to May 2023. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines were followed. χ2 test was performed to compare the prevalence within the groups.

Results:

Six nonrandomized trials and one randomized, with a total of 962 patients, were included. The overall incidence of ureteral stenosis of 0.9%. UAS sizes were 9.5/11.5Fr, 10/12Fr, 11/13Fr, 12/14Fr, and 14/16Fr. Within each subgroup, the incidence of ureteral stenosis was 0.4, 8, 0, 1, and 1% (p = 0.099). No trend for stenosis was observed among larger UAS.

Conclusions:

In this systematic review, no relationship between UAS diameter and incidence of ureteral stenosis was observed. Nonetheless, additional randomized controlled trials are required to support this finding.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: LILACS / VETINDEX Main subject: Urethral Stricture / Ureteral Calculi / Ureteroscopy / Systematic Review Type of study: Systematic_reviews Language: En Journal: Acta cir. bras Journal subject: CIRURGIA GERAL / Procedimentos Cir£rgicos Operat¢rios Year: 2023 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: LILACS / VETINDEX Main subject: Urethral Stricture / Ureteral Calculi / Ureteroscopy / Systematic Review Type of study: Systematic_reviews Language: En Journal: Acta cir. bras Journal subject: CIRURGIA GERAL / Procedimentos Cir£rgicos Operat¢rios Year: 2023 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Brazil
...