Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intrarenal pressure and irrigation flow with commonly used ureteric access sheaths and instruments

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Flexible ureterorenoscopy is becoming a first-line treatment for many intrarenal stones. Ureteric access sheaths are commonly used to aid access, stone removal and reduce intrarenal pressure. We evaluated the effects of two commonly used access sheaths on irrigation flow and intrarenal pressure during flexible ureterorenoscopy. We measured the effect of scope instrumentation on flow and pressure.

          Material and methods

          We utilized a 10/12F and 12/14F, 35 cm Re-Trace™ access sheath with a FlexX2 scope in a cadaveric porcine kidney. We evaluated the effect of four Nitinol baskets (1.3F, 1.5F, 1.9F, 2.2F), three different 200 µm laser fibres and a hand-held pump. Measurements of irrigation flow and intrarenal pressure were recorded and compared between the different sized access sheaths.

          Results

          Flow rates varied widely between access sheaths. Without instrumentation, mean flow was 17 mls/min (10/12F access sheath), versus 33 mls/min (12/14F sheath) (p <0.0001). Increasing basket size produced a gradual reduction in flow and pressure in both access sheaths. Reassuringly, pressures were low overall (<40 cm H 2O). Pressures were significantly reduced when using the larger 12/14F sheath, with and without all instrumentations (p <0.0001). Hand-held pump devices have a marked effect on flow and pressure in both sheaths; with pressures rising up to 121 cm H 2O with a 10/12F sheath, versus 29 cm H 2O (12/14F) (p <0.0001).

          Conclusions

          A 12/14F access sheath offered significantly improved irrigation whilst maintaining significantly lower intrarenal pressure, when compared to a 10/12F access sheath in a cadaveric porcine model. Scope instrumentation affects irrigation flow and pressure in both sized sheaths. Furthermore, there should be caution with hand-held pump devices, especially with smaller sized sheaths, as intrarenal pressure can be very high.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Irrigant flow and intrarenal pressure during flexible ureteroscopy: the effect of different access sheaths, working channel instruments, and hydrostatic pressure.

          Our aim was to determine the optimal size of access sheath for ureteroscopy and stone lasertripsy to achieve good irrigant flow while maintaining the lowest possible intrarenal pressure.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Safety and efficacy of ureteral access sheaths.

            The ureteral access sheath (UAS) was introduced as a means of passing a flexible ureteroscope. Although the device was initially lauded for its ability to facilitate ureteroscopic access, passage was difficult and risked ureteral injury, and the UAS fell out of favor until the development of a new generation of devices that was easier to insert. The UAS should be advanced under fluoroscopy over a stiff guidewire, and the surgeon should ensure copious hydration of all inner and outer surfaces. Use of the UAS is purported to improve irrigant flow and visibility. The UAS can induce transient ureteral ischemia and promote an acute inflammatory response, but it also prevents potentially harmful elevations in intrarenal pressure. Unequivocal data are not yet available to suggest that UAS use during ureteroscopy protects or harms the upper urinary tract. The UAS also has the potential to improve stone-free rates by allowing passive egress or active retrieval of fragments. A large prospective study is needed to unequivocally determine if UAS use is superior in terms of stone-free rates. Cost studies reported to favor UAS use, although a formal cost-effectiveness analysis has not been performed. Further study is needed before routine use of the UAS can be recommended.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Which ureteral access sheath is compatible with your flexible ureteroscope?

              Our aim is to evaluate different ureteral access sheaths (UASs), which are available in the international market and their compatibility with different available flexible ureteroscopes (F-URSs) to help the urologist choose the proper ureteral access sheath for his or her endoscope before commencing the procedure.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cent European J Urol
                Cent European J Urol
                CEJU
                Central European Journal of Urology
                Polish Urological Association
                2080-4806
                2080-4873
                02 November 2015
                2015
                : 68
                : 4
                : 434-438
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Department of Urology, Southampton, United Kingdom
                [2 ]University Hospital Southampton, Department of Urology, Southampton, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Corresponding author Nicholas Rukin, The Royal Wolverhampton Hospitals NHS Trust, New Cross Hospital, Wednesfield Road WV10 0QP, Wolverhampton, UK. phone: +44 1902 307999. nick.rukin@ 123456nhs.net
                Article
                00604
                10.5173/ceju.2015.604
                4742436
                26855796
                160dc405-d909-48e4-a135-362a73e6b650
                Copyright by Polish Urological Association

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.

                History
                : 25 March 2015
                : 06 May 2015
                : 01 September 2015
                Categories
                Original Paper

                ureterorenoscopy,access sheaths,flow,pressure,laser fibres,nitinol baskets

                Comments

                Comment on this article