A historical comparison of thulium fiber laser systems for stone lithotripsy: navigating toward safe and effective parameters.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Medical device companies have introduced new TFL machines, including Soltive (Olympus, Japan), Fiber Dust (Quanta System, Italy), and TFLDrive (Coloplast, France). The primary objective of this study is to compare our initial clinical experiences with TFL using those devices. Through this historical comparison of Thulium Fiber Laser systems for stone lithotripsy, we aim to advance our understanding and approach toward achieving safe and effective TFL parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data for this comparative analysis were extracted from three distinct prospective series that were previously published, outlining our initial clinical experience with the Soltive (Olympus, Japan), FiberDust laser (Quanta System, Italy), and TFLDrive laser (Coloplast, France). Parameters such as stone size, stone density, laser-on time (LOT), and laser settings were meticulously recorded. Additionally, we assessed critical variables such as ablation speed (expressed in mm3/s) and Joules/mm3 for each lithotripsy procedure. RESULTS: A total of 149 patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 120 patients were subjected to analysis concerning renal stones. Statistically significant differences were observed in the median (IQR) stone volume: 650 (127-6027) mm3 for TFLDrive, 1800 (682.8-2760) mm3 for Soltive, and 1125 (294-4000) mm3 for FiberDust (p: 0.007); while there were no differences regarding stone density among the groups. Significant variations were identified in median (IQR) pulse energy, frequency, and total power. The Soltive group exhibited lower energy levels (0.3 J vs. 0.6 J, p: 0.002) but significantly higher pulse frequency (100 Hz vs. 17.5 Hz, p: 0.003) and total power (24 W vs. 11W, p: 0.001) compared to the other groups. Laser-on time showed no substantial differences across all three groups. Additionally, a statistically significant difference was observed in median J/mm3, with the TFLDrive group using higher values (24 J/mm3, p: 0.001), while the Soltive group demonstrated a higher median ablation speed of 1.16 mm3/s (p: 0.001). The overall complication rate remained low for all groups, with comparable stone-free rates. CONCLUSION: By reducing pulsed frequency, we improved laser efficiency, but smaller volumes lead to decreased efficiency due to increased retropulsion and fragment movement. Further studies are needed to identify and establish the appropriate laser settings for this new technology.

[Flexible ureteroscopy for lower pole renal stones: novel superpulse thulium (TM) fiber laser lithotripsy].

INTRODUCTION: The SuperPulse Thulium (Tm) fiber laser (wavelength of 1.94 m) has been recently introduced as a directed-energy source for urology. Preclinical studies have shown a significant potential of the SuperPulse Tm fiber laser (SP TFL) for lithotripsy. However, clinical reports of using SP TFL to treat urolithiasis are still few and limited. Of special interest are challenging cases, e.g., lower pole stones, when extreme deflection of the instrument is required. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the SuperPulse Tm fiber laser in the management of lower pole small calyceal stones during flexible ureteroscopy (F-URS). METHOD: s. The SuperPulse Tm fiber laser device (Urolase 2, IRE Polus, Fryazino, Russia) has been cleared for clinical use by the Ministry of Health of Russian Federation. Study protocol has been approved by the Ethical Review Committee. Between January 2018 and February 2019, 130 patients with kidney stones have undergone Thulium fiber laser lithotripsy during F-URS. We retrospectively analyzed 15 of this patients with a single radiopaque lower pole calculus that were included in the present study. Stone size, stone density, lithotripsy time (from the first to last footswitch press) and "lasering" (laser emission) time were measured. The SP TFL was used for stone disintegration with different settings in dusting and fragmentation modes (0.1 - 4J, 7-300Hz, 6-40W) via a fiber with a 200-m core diameter. Low dose CT scanning was performed on POD 90 to assess SFR. RESULTS: Stone size ranged from 4 to 17 mm and stone density varied from 350 to 1459 HU. The average lithotripsy time was 12 min (3-30 min). The average "lasering" time was 1.3 min (0.4-2.5 min) and the mean hospital stay was 1.1+/-0.3 days. In all cases we reached the lower pole stone containing calyx with a laser fiber. The complication rates were evaluated by using the Clavien-Dindo grading system and did not exceed GII (6.6%). SFR on POD 90 was achieved in 86.6% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: F-URS with SuperPulse Tm fiber laser is safe and effective option in the management of lower pole small calyceal stones. The possibility of using small laser fibers gives better instrument deflection which make possible to reach lower pole calyceal stones even with acute lower pole infundibulopelvic angle (IPA).

Comparative study of the treatment of 20-30 mm renal stones with miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureterorenoscopy in obese patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPNL) for 20-30 mm renal stones in obese patients regarding efficacy and safety. METHODS: Between May 2011 and June 2017, 254 obese patients who had 20-30 mm kidney stone were consecutively included in the study; 106 patients underwent mPNL and 148 underwent f-URS by the same surgeon. The following parameters were retrospectively assessed: patient and stone characteristics, surgical details, perioperative outcomes, and stone-free rates (SFR). RESULTS: F-URS group was similar to mPNL group in terms of the mean duration of surgery (92.8 ± 26.1 vs 87.4 ± 31.5 min, P = 0.137) and the final SFR (89.1 vs 92.5%, P = 0.381). The f-URS group had significantly shorter postoperative stay (1.0 ± 0.8 vs 4.3 ± 1.7 days, P < 0.001) and lower postoperative complications (11.5 vs 26.4%, P = 0.002). However, the f-URS group had a lower SFR after first session (67.2 vs 87.4%, P < 0.001) and needed more number of procedures (1.5 ± 0.4 vs 1.3 ± 0.4, P < 0.001) than the mPNL group. CONCLUSIONS: MPNL has a higher efficacy (higher SFR after first session and lower number of procedures); however, f-URS offers advantages regarding safety (lower complication rate). Therefore, both options can be offered to obese patients with renal stones from 20 to 30 mm in size. Nevertheless, these results must be confirmed by further prospective randomized trials.

Comparison of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy and flexible ureterorenoscopy for the management of 10-20 mm renal stones in obese patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare effectivity and safety of flexible ureteroscopy (F-URS) and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPNL) for 10-20 mm renal stones in obese patients. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2015, charts of patients who were treated with F-URS or mPNL for 10-20 mm kidney stone(s) were analyzed. Patients with BMI > 30 kg/m(2) were enrolled into the study. Total of 315 patients were treated with mPNL, and 56 patients were matched our inclusion criteria. In the same period, F-URS was performed in 669 patients, and 157 of them had 10-20 mm kidney stones, and their BMI values were >30 kg/m(2). The patients were retrospectively matched at a 1:1 ratio to index F-URS-mPNL cases with respect to the patient age, gender, ASA score, BMI and size, number, and location of stone. RESULTS: Gender, age, BMI, stone size, stone number, location of stone(s), and ASA scores were similar between groups. The mean operation time was significantly longer in mPNL group (p: 0.021). However, the mean fluoroscopy time was similar (p: 0.270). Hemoglobin drop requiring blood transfusion and angioembolization was performed in two and one patients after mPNL, respectively. Overall complication rate was significantly higher in mPNL group than F-URS group (30.3 vs. 5.3 %, p: 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrated that both F-URS and mPNL achieve acceptable stone-free rates in obese patients with 10-20 mm renal stones. However, complication rates were significantly lower in F-URS group.

Management of deceased and living kidney donor with lithiasis: a multicenter retrospective study on behalf of the renal transplant group of the Spanish urological association.

BACKGROUND: To maximize the availability of suitable grafts and ensure effective management, several reports have demonstrated successful outcomes when using kidney grafts with urolithiasis. This multicenter study reports on the management and long-term outcomes of kidney transplantation using renal grafts with lithiasis. METHODS: Retrospective data from three Spanish hospitals were analyzed for kidney transplants involving grafts with nephrolithiasis performed between December 2009 and August 2023. The study included adult patients, excluding those with incomplete records. It evaluated stone characteristics, complications, and outcomes in recipients and in living kidney donors. RESULTS: Out of 38 analyzed kidney transplants, 57.9% were cadaveric and 42.1% were from living kidney donors. Most diagnoses were incidental during donor evaluation, with an average stone size of 7.06 mm. After follow-up (median 26 months), all recipients but one had functioning grafts, and there were no stone recurrences in both recipients and living kidney donors. Conservative management was adopted in 28 cases, while 10 cases required ex-vivo flexible ureterorenoscopy for stone removal. Following conservative management, 5 patients needed additional treatments for stone-related events. CONCLUSIONS: Kidneys with lithiasis can be considered for transplantation in selected cases, resulting in good functional outcomes with no stone recurrence in recipients or living donors.

Flexible ureteroscopy under local anesthesia for stone management: initial exploration and two-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) is a minimally invasive surgical technique used for treating urinary tract stones. While general anesthesia (GA) is the standard method used, it comes with risks. Local anesthesia (LA) is a safer and more cost-effective alternative to GA, and its use in f-URS could potentially reduce patients' risks and increase accessibility to treatment. This study aims to investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of using LA for f-URS in treating stones, as an initial experience in the diagnosis related group (DRG) era of China. METHODS: Patients who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were continuously included in the study Between 2021 and 2023. We analyzed the stone free status, postoperative complication rate, hospitalization costs, and presented key points of the procedure performed under LA that we had summarized over the past two years. RESULTS: A study of 614 patients undergoing f-URS under LA for urinary stones in our hospital showed 83.4% stone-free rate with a mean operative time of 44.12 ± 16.63 minutes; 18 patients experienced fever postoperatively, and 12 had ureteral injuries. No severe complication was reported. The cost of LA was found to be only 1.7% of the DRG payment, which is around $40. The highest VAS scores were observed during the sheath insertion, with STAI scores decreasing during and after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed that f-URS administered under LA was a well-tolerated, efficient, safe, and economical procedure. In the DRG era, this new anesthetic option for f-URS provides urologists with a more cost-effective alternative.

Living donor-gifted allograft lithiasis: surgical experience after bench surgery stone removal and follow-up.

This study presents the surgical experience and long-term outcomes of living donor kidney transplantations involving asymptomatic kidney stones, using ex vivo flexible ureterorenoscopy (f-URS) during bench surgery for stone removal. Out of 1743 living kidney donors assessed between January 2012 and October 2022, 18 (1%) were diagnosed with urolithiasis. Among them, 12 donors were rejected, and 6 were accepted for kidney donation. Stone removal was successfully performed using f-URS during bench surgery, with no immediate complications or acute rejections observed. The study analyzed six living kidney transplants, of which 4 (67%) donors and three recipients were female, and 4 (67%) donors were blood-related to the recipient. The median age for donors and recipients was 57.5 and 51.5 years, respectively. The stones, primarily located in the lower calyx, had a median size of 6 mm. The median cold ischemia time during surgery was 41.6 min, and ex vivo f-URS ensured complete stone removal in all cases. After a median follow-up of 120 months, the remaining grafts were functioning well, and no urinary stone recurrence was observed in either the recipients or living donors. The findings suggest that bench f-URS is a safe approach for managing urinary stones in kidney grafts, providing good functional outcomes without stone recurrence in selected cases.

The Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin (NGAL) as a Biomarker for Monitoring Renal Function in Patients with Solitary Kidney Stones: A Single-Center, Retrospective Analysis of 23 Cases.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of flexible ureteroscopy (F-URS) in treating single kidney stones and the role of Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin (NGAL) in detecting early renal function abnormalities in patients with solitary kidney stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 23 patients with solitary kidney nephrolithiasis who underwent F-URS at the Sichuan Science City Hospital between January 2017 and November 2020. We collected data on the following variables: Age, gender, stone size, surgery time, perioperative outcomes, and complications; Stone-free rates (SFRs) were calculated using computed tomography (CT). Serum creatinine (SCr) and NGAL levels were tested before surgery and at one-day and one-month postoperatively. RESULTS: The average size of the stones was 1.53 ± 0.57 cm. The average operating time was 59.28 ± 21.25 minutes. For urethral stricture, three patients (13.0%) required second-stage F-URS. The SFRs were 91.3% following the first and second treatments. The mean NGAL levels were significantly increased at one-day postoperatively compared to baseline (768.91 ± 514.50 ng/mL vs. 173.39 ± 147.94 ng/mL, respectively, p < 0.001). Minor complications, including gross hematuria (n = 5) and mild fever (n = 3), occurred in 34.8% of cases (n = 8), who recovered quickly. CONCLUSIONS: F-URS is a safe and efficient therapeutic approach for patients with solitary kidney nephrolithiasis, and NGAL has huge prospects as an indicator of early-stage renal injury in this patient population.

Safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy vs. flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of urinary calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) and flexible ureteroscopy lithotripsy (f-URS) in treating urinary tract stones. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for literature comparing SWL with f-URS. The primary outcomes we focused on were stone-free rate (SFR) and complications; the secondary outcomes were operation time, hospital stay, retreatment rate, number of sessions, and auxiliary procedures rate. We used ReviewManager version 5.4.1 and STATA version 14.2 for meta-analysis. Results: Seventeen studies with a total of 2,265 patients were included in the meta-analysis, including 1,038 patients in the SWL group and 1,227 patients in the f-URS group. The meta-analysis indicated that patients in the f-URS group had higher SFR than those in the SWL group [odds ratio (OR): 2.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.29-3.12, p = 0.002]. In addition, we found no significant difference in complications (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.85-1.37) between the two treatments. Also, we found that the retreatment rate and the auxiliary procedure rate in the f-URS group were significantly lower than those in the SWL group (OR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02-0.24, p < 0.00001; OR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.11-0.83, p = 0.02). Moreover, the number of sessions in the f-URS group was significantly lower than that in the SWL group [mean difference (MD): -1.96, 95% CI: -1.55 to -0.33, p = 0.003]. However, the operation time and hospital stay in the f-URS group were significantly longer than those in the SWL group (MD: 11.24, 95% CI: 3.51-18.56, p = 0.004; MD: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.85-1.42, p < 0.00001). Conclusion: For 1-2-cm urinary stones, f-URS can achieve a higher SFR than SWL while having a lower retreatment rate, number of sessions, and auxiliary procedure rate. For urinary stones <1 cm, there was no significant difference in SFR between SWL and f-URS groups. The SWL group has a shorter operative time and hospital stay than the f-URS group.

Renal stone density on native CT-scan as a predictor of treatment outcomes in shock wave lithotripsy.

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) is considered a standard treatment for nephrolith or kidney stones measuring less than 20 mm. Anatomical, machine-related, and stone factors play pivotal roles in treatment outcomes, the latter being the leading role. This paper examined the relationship between stone density on native CT scans and ESWL treatment to remove renal stones concerning several treatments. One hundred and twenty patients (64 males and 56 females) were enrolled and completed the study from April 2019 to September 2020. Inclusion criteria were a single renal pelvis stone of 5-20 mm to be treated for the first time in adult patients with no urinary or musculoskeletal anatomical abnormalities. We assessed patients' renal function and obtained stone characteristics using a native CT scan. Patients were then scheduled for ESWL by the same machine and operator under fluoroscopy, with two-week intervals between treatment sessions when more than one treatment session was required. Before each new session, a new KUB-US was performed to reevaluate the stone. One hundred and twenty patient records were analyzed, 64 (53.3%) males and 56 (46.7%) females, with a mean age of 38.6 years and a mean stone size of 13.15 mm. Treatment with ESWL cleared stones in 76 (63.3%) patients, while 44 (36.7%) failed the treatment. The mean stone density in patients whose stones were cleared was significantly lower (661 vs. 1001) (P<0.001). Estimating renal calculus (or kidney stone) density on a native CT scan might help prognosticate ESWL treatment outcomes regarding stone clearance rates and the number of sessions required to clear a stone.

Does preoperative use of silodosin affect the stages of F-URS procedure? / ¿Afecta el uso de silodosin preoperatorio los pasos de la ureteroscopia flexible?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of silodosin on stages of the flexible ureterorenoscopy (F-URS) procedures. METHODS: Between November 2015 and August 2017, a total of 76 patients suffering from 10-30 mm kidney stone were enrolled in this randomized prospective study. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups for treatment: Group 1 had F-URS with preoperative daily uptake of 8 mg silodosin for 10 days, and group 2 had F-URS without silodosin uptake. None of the patients had preoperative JJ stenting. Stages of the F-URS was defined as entrance to bladder time (ETBT) with a semirigid ureterorenoscope (R-URS), entrance to ureteric orifice time (ETUOT) with R-URS using a guide wire and proceeding 2 cm inside the ureter, application of access sheath time (AAST) using the guide wire advanced through R-URS, F-URS time (FURST) + lithotripsy with laser time (LT), and total operation time (OT). We compared the time of each stage between two groups. RESULTS: There were 38 patients group1 and 2, respectively. There was one ureteral access sheath (UAS) application failure in group 1, and 3 failures in group 2 (p=0.307). The ETBT, ETUOT, and AAST were significantly short in group 1 than group 2 (p=0.001,0.007,0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Although preoperative use of silodosin facilitated only an insignificant positive effect on UAS placement failure, it eased the F-URS procedure by reducing the ETBT, ETUOT, and AAST in seconds. More studies are needed to make an exact conclusion.

OBJETIVOS: Evaluar el efecto de la silodosina en las etapas de los procedimientos de ureterorrenoscopia flexible (F-URS).MÉTODOS: Entre noviembre de 2015 y agosto de 2017, un total de 76 pacientes con cálculos renales de 10-30 mm se inscribieron en este estudio prospectivo aleatorizado. Los pacientes se dividieron aleatoriamente en 2 grupos para el tratamiento: el grupo 1 tenía F-URS con captación diaria preoperatoria de 8 mg de silodosina durante 10 días, y el grupo 2 tenía F-URS sin captación de silodosina. Ninguno de los pacientes tenía stent JJ preoperatorio. Las etapas del F-URS se definieron como entrada al tiempo de la vejiga (ETBT) con un ureterorrenoscopio semirrígido (R-URS), entrada al tiempo del orificio ureteral (ETUOT) con R-URS usando una guía y 2 cm dentro del uréter. Aplicación del tiempo de vaina de acceso (AAST) utilizando el cable de guía avanzado a través de R-URS, tiempo de F-URS (FURST) + litotricia con tiempo de láser (LT) y tiempo total de operación (OT). Comparamos el tiempo de cada etapa entre dos grupos. RESULTADOS: Hubo 38 pacientes grupo 1 y 2, respectivamente. Hubo una falla en la aplicación de la cubierta de acceso ureteral (UAS) en el grupo 1 y 3 fallas en el grupo 2 (p=0,307). ETBT, ETUOT y AAST fueron significativamente cortos en el grupo 1 que en el grupo 2 (p=0,001, 0,007, 0,002). CONCLUSIONES: Aunque el uso preoperatorio de silodosina facilitó solo un efecto positivo insignificante en la falla de colocación de UAS, alivió el procedimiento de F-URS al reducir el ETBT, ETUOT y AAST en segundos. Se necesitan más estudios para llegar a una conclusión exacta.

Robotic stone surgery - Current state and future prospects: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a comprehensive review of robot-assisted surgery in urolithiasis and to consider the future prospects of robotic approaches in stone surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a systematic PubMed© literature search using predefined Medical Subject Headings search terms to identify PubMed-listed clinical research studies on robotic stone surgery. All authors screened the results for eligibility and two independent reviewers performed the data extraction. RESULTS: The most common approach in robotic stone surgery is a robot-assisted pyelolithotomy using the da Vinci™ system (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Several studies show this technique to be comparable to classic laparoscopic and open surgical interventions. One study that focused on ureteric stones showed a similar result. In recent years, promising data on robotic intrarenal surgery have been reported (Roboflex Avicenna™; Elmed Medical Systems, Ankara, Turkey). Initial studies have shown its feasibility and high stone-free rates and prove that this novel endoscopic approach is safe for the patient and comfortable for the surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits of robotic devices in stone surgery in existing endourological, laparoscopic, and open treatment strategies still need elucidation. Although recent data are promising, more prospective randomised controlled studies are necessary to clarify the impact of this technique on patient safety and stone-free rates.

Bilateral same-session flexible ureterorenoscopy for renal and/or ureteric stone disease treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of bilateral same-session flexible ureterorenoscopy (f-URS) in the treatment of bilateral renal and/or ureteric stone disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From October 2007 to December 2015, 62 patients who had undergone bilateral, same-session f-URS were included in the study. The procedures were performed under general anaesthesia, in lithotomy, and initiated on the side in which the patient was clinically symptomatic or on the side in which the stone was smaller. Plain abdominal radiography, intravenous urography, renal ultrasonography and/or non-contrast computed tomography scans were conducted in all patients. The success rate was defined as, patients who were stone-free or only had residual fragments of <3 mm. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients (43 male, 19 female), with a mean (SD) age of 39 (15.1) years, were included. The mean (SD) stone size was 23.2 (6.11) mm with a mean (SD) operative time of 58.8 (16.24) min. The stone-free rates were 90.3% and 100% after the first and second procedures, respectively. The mean (SD) hospital stay was 1.58 (0.72) days. There were minor complications (Clavien-Dindo grade I-II) in 10 (16%) patients and major complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV), e.g. distal ureter laceration and laser injury of the ureter, in two patients. CONCLUSION: Same session bilateral f-URS is a successful and safe method for bilateral renal and/or ureteric stones.

Training in ureteroscopy for urolithiasis.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an insight into the current status of semi-rigid and flexible ureteroscopy, following new curricula for training methods, including training with models, virtual reality and active mentoring. METHODS: We systematically reviewed previous reports, including articles in English identified using the following strategy: ('ureteroscopy'[Mesh]) or ('urolithiasis'[Mesh]) AND ('education'[Mesh]), or ('teaching'[Mesh]). Abstracts submitted at congresses were not included. Relevant articles that were identified as references in the retrieved articles were also included. RESULTS: The terms ('urolithiasis'[Mesh] AND 'education'[Mesh]) retrieved 106 articles, of which five were included. The terms ('urolithiasis'[Mesh] AND 'teaching'[Mesh]) retrieved six articles, of which three were included. The terms ('ureteroscopy'[Mesh] AND 'education'[Mesh]) retrieved 29 articles, of which 21 were included. The terms ('ureteroscopy'[Mesh] AND 'teaching'[Mesh]) retrieved eight articles, of which seven were included. Remaining articles were found in the reference section of retrieved articles. Finally, 43 articles were included. Four randomised controlled trials with level 1b evidence were included. Currently there is no standard teaching method for ureteroscopy and the number of cases to reach competence has not yet been defined. However, simulation-based training has been shown to be effective, cost-effective, and to increase patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Simulators lead to a more rapid acquisition of skills in ureteroscopy than do conventional training methods, and improve the performance of future surgeons. Flexible ureteroscopy simulators are a promising tool for training, and have the advantage of minimising the need for learning the procedures on patients. A didactic and clinical curriculum, including surgical videotape reviews as well as operative mentoring, enables a rapid progression in already experienced endourologists. However, there are few reports specifically addressing the skills necessary for training.

Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy vs. percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs. flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower-pole stones.

OBJECTIVES: To review previous reports and discuss current trends in extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureterorenoscopy (URS). ESWL was recommended as the first-line treatment for small and intermediate-sized stones in the lower pole, while it is the standard treatment for large stones. However, the stone clearance rate after ESWL seems to be lower than that of stones in other locations. This seems to result from a lower rate of fragment passage, due to anatomical factors. METHODS: Reports on urinary stone disease were reviewed, assessing only publications in peer-reviewed, Medline-listed journals in the English language (publication years 1990-2011). RESULTS: Recent experience with flexible URS (fURS) for intrarenal stones showed that excellent stone-free rates can be achieved. With increasing experience and technically improved equipment, fURS has become an alternative to ESWL for small and intermediate-sized renal stones. Furthermore, several authors reported successful retrograde treatment for large renal stones, proposing fURS as an alternative to PCNL. However, the major drawbacks are long operating times and commonly, staged procedures, which is why PCNL remains the method of choice for such stones. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the currents trends and evidence, the 2012 update of the European Association of Urology Guidelines on Urolithiasis has upgraded the endourological treatment of kidney stones. Individual factors such as body habitus, renal anatomy, costs and patient preference must be considered.