Clinical comparative study of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones: a retrospective case-controlled study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones. METHODS: We enrolled 135 patients underwent reusable flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) and 78 patients underwent single-use digital FURS. Demographic, clinical variables, anatomical parameters of the lower calyx and perioperative indicators were compared in the two groups. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients in the infundibuloureter angle (IPA) < 45° subgroup had a mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), including 25 patients in the reusable FURS group and 11 patients in the single-use FURS group. The demographic and clinical variables in the two FURS groups were comparable. There was no statistical difference in the success rate of stone searching (P > 0.05). In terms of the success rate of lithotripsy, there was also no statistical difference in the IPA ≥ 45° subgroup (P > 0.05), whereas single-use FURS was superior in the IPA < 45° subgroup (χ2 = 6.513, P = 0.011). The length of the working fiber in the reusable FURS and single-use FURS groups was 3.20 ± 0.68 mm and 1.75 ± 0.47 mm, respectively (t = 18.297, P < 0.05). The use of a stone basket in the reusable FURS (31/135, 23.0%) was significantly higher than that in the single-use FURS (8/78, 10.3%) (χ2 = 5.336, P = 0.021). Compared with the reusable FURS group, the single-use FURS group had shorter operation times (P < 0.05) and higher stone-free rate (SFR) (χ2 = 4.230, P = 0.040). There was no statistical difference in the intraoperative transfer of mini-PCNL and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Single-use and reusable FURS are alternative methods for removal of lower pole stones (i.e., 2 cm or less). Single-use FURS has a high success rate of lithotripsy, shorter operation time, and high stone-free rate.

Pelvicalyceal anatomy on the accessibility of reusable flexible ureteroscopy to lower pole calyx during retrograde intrarenal surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the pelvicalyceal anatomy on accessibility of reusable flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) to the lower pole calyx during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). METHODS: Here, 854 patients with ureteral or kidney stones with access to a renal collecting system using reusable fURS were classified into either the accessible group, in whom the deepest lower pole calyces could be touched; and the inaccessible group, in whom the deepest lower calyces could not be touched. We measured the infundibulopelvic angle (IPA), infundibular width (IW), infundibular length (IL), and calyceal pelvic height (CPH) using retrograde pyelograms and performed intergroup comparisons. RESULTS: The median IPA, IW, IL, and CPH in the accessible and inaccessible group were 60.5° and 45.6° (p < 0.001), 10.8 and 9.4 mm (p < 0.001), 33.2 and 36.4 mm (p < 0.001), and 25.9 and 30.9 mm (p < 0.001), respectively. IPA (OR 0.963, 95% CI 0.952-0.974, p < 0.001) and IW (OR 0.519, 95% CI 0.331-0.816, p = 0.004) were significant risk factors of renal pelvicalyceal anatomy related to the accessibility of the lower pole calyces. The cut-off value for IPA and IW was 45.8°(p < 0.001) and 7.8 mm (p < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: IPA < 45.8° and IW <7.8 mm were negative predictors to access the lower pole calyces when using reusable fURS during RIRS.