Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Systematic review of ureteral access sheaths: facts and myths.
De Coninck, Vincent; Keller, Etienne Xavier; Rodríguez-Monsalve, María; Audouin, Marie; Doizi, Steeve; Traxer, Olivier.
Afiliación
  • De Coninck V; Urology Department, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  • Keller EX; GRC no. 20, Urolithiasis Clinical Research Group, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France.
  • Rodríguez-Monsalve M; Urology Department, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  • Audouin M; GRC no. 20, Urolithiasis Clinical Research Group, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France.
  • Doizi S; Urology Department, Sorbonne University, Paris, France.
  • Traxer O; GRC no. 20, Urolithiasis Clinical Research Group, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France.
BJU Int ; 122(6): 959-969, 2018 12.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29752769
ABSTRACT
The aim of the present paper was to review the literature on all available ureteral access sheaths (UASs) with their indications, limitations, risks, advantages and disadvantages in current modern endourological practice. Two authors searched Medline, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science databases to identify studies on UASs published in English. No time period restriction was applied. All original articles reporting outcomes or innovations were included. Additional articles identified through references lists were also included. Case reports, editorials, letters, review articles and meeting abstracts were excluded. A total of 754 abstracts were screened, 176 original articles were assessed for eligibility and 83 articles were included in the review. Based on a low level of evidence, UASs increase irrigation flow during flexible ureteroscopy and decrease intrapelvic pressure and probably infectious complications. Data were controversial and sparse on the impact of UASs on multiple reinsertions and withdrawals of a ureteroscope, stone-free rates, ureteroscope protection or damage, postoperative pain, risk of ureteral strictures, and also on its cost-effectiveness. Studies on the benefit of UASs in paediatrics and in patients with a coagulopathy were inconclusive. In the absence of good randomized data, the true impact of UASs on surgery outcome remains unclear. The present review may contribute to the evidence-based decision-making process at the individual patient level regarding whether or not a UAS should be used.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Cálculos Renales / Ureteroscopía / Dilatación Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BJU Int Asunto de la revista: UROLOGIA Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Francia Pais de publicación: ENGLAND / ESCOCIA / GB / GREAT BRITAIN / INGLATERRA / REINO UNIDO / SCOTLAND / UK / UNITED KINGDOM

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Cálculos Renales / Ureteroscopía / Dilatación Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: BJU Int Asunto de la revista: UROLOGIA Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Francia Pais de publicación: ENGLAND / ESCOCIA / GB / GREAT BRITAIN / INGLATERRA / REINO UNIDO / SCOTLAND / UK / UNITED KINGDOM