Flexible ureteroscopy with and without ureteral access sheath in treatment of large renal stones: a randomized controlled study

被引:2
作者
Abdelrasol, Waheed Fawzy [1 ]
Assem, Ahmed [2 ]
机构
[1] New Valley Univ, Fac Med, Urol Dept, New Valley, Egypt
[2] Cairo Univ, Kasr Alainy Sch Med, Urol Dept, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
Flexible ureteroscopy; Renal stone; Ureteral access sheath; OUTCOMES; RATES;
D O I
10.1186/s12301-024-00463-w
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background In flexible ureteroscopy (FURS), the ureteral access sheath (UAS) is extensively used due to its superior stone-free rates and reduced intrarenal pressure. However, it may cause damage to the ureteral wall and increase surgery costs. Therefore, we aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of FURS with and without UAS in treating renal stones. Methods This randomized controlled trial included 84 patients with upper ureteric and kidney stones undergoing FURS. Patients were randomized into two equal groups: Group I FURS treated with UAS and Group II FURS treated without UAS as a control group. Results Operative time was significantly delayed in Group I 69.52 +/- 14.52 min as opposed to Group II 63.1 +/- 9.69 min (p = 0.019). Cumulative stone size exhibited significantly greater values in Group I than Group II (p value < 0.001). The need for ancillary procedures was significantly higher in Group I than in Group II (p value = 0.047). Preoperative and postoperative stent, complications, renal colic pain, urinary tract infection, and length of stay were insignificantly different among the two groups. Conclusions Performing FURS without utilizing UAS appears safe and requires fewer additional procedures. Another benefit is the reduction in surgical duration and avoiding ureteral complications.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 19 条
[1]   Factors affecting complication rates of retrograde flexible ureterorenoscopy: analysis of 1571 procedures-a single-center experience [J].
Bas, Okan ;
Tuygun, Can ;
Dede, Onur ;
Sari, Sercan ;
Cakici, Mehmet Caglar ;
Ozturk, Ufuk ;
Goktug, Goksel ;
Imamoglu, Abdurrahim .
WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 35 (05) :819-826
[2]   The use of a ureteral access sheath does not improve stone-free rate after ureteroscopy for upper urinary tract stones [J].
Berquet, Gaetan ;
Prunel, Paul ;
Verhoest, Gregory ;
Mathieu, Romain ;
Bensalah, Karim .
WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 32 (01) :229-232
[3]  
Cristallo C, 2022, ACTAS UROL ESP, V46, P354, DOI [10.1016/j.acuro.2021.04.006, 10.1016/j.acuroe.2021.12.006]
[4]   Systematic review of ureteral access sheaths: facts and myths [J].
De Coninck, Vincent ;
Keller, Etienne Xavier ;
Rodriguez-Monsalve, Maria ;
Audouin, Marie ;
Doizi, Steeve ;
Traxer, Olivier .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2018, 122 (06) :959-969
[5]  
Elbakary M., 2023, Research Square, DOI [10.21203/rs.3.rs-2773644/v1, DOI 10.21203/RS.3.RS-2773644/V1]
[6]  
Geavlete Bogdan, 2021, J Med Life, V14, P481, DOI 10.25122/jml-2021-0217
[7]   Outcomes of flexible ureteroscopy and laser fragmentation for treatment of large renal stones with and without the use of ureteral access sheaths: Results from a university hospital with a review of literature [J].
Geraghty, Robert M. ;
Ishii, Hiro ;
Somani, Bhaskar K. .
SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 50 (03) :216-219
[8]   Trends in urological stone disease: a 5-year update of hospital episode statistics [J].
Heers, Hendrik ;
Turney, Benjamin W. .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 118 (05) :785-789
[9]   Use of the ureteral access sheath during ureteroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Huang, Jian ;
Zhao, Zhijian ;
AlSmadi, Jad Khaled ;
Liang, Xiongfa ;
Zhong, Fangling ;
Zeng, Tao ;
Wu, Weizhou ;
Deng, Tuo ;
Lai, Yongchang ;
Liu, Luhao ;
Zeng, Guohua ;
Wu, Wenqi .
PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (02)
[10]   Use of ureteral access sheaths in ureteroscopy [J].
Kaplan, Adam G. ;
Lipkin, Michael E. ;
Scales, Charles D., Jr. ;
Preminger, Glenn M. .
NATURE REVIEWS UROLOGY, 2016, 13 (03) :135-140