Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
24
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Scoping Review of Experimental and Clinical Evidence and Its Influence on Development of the Suction Ureteral Access Sheath

      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

          The ureteral access sheath (UAS) has been a boon and a bane in flexible ureteroscopy (FURS), with its merits and demerits well established. Its design and dimensions were instrumental in reshaping the way flexible scopes were used and were key adjuncts to establishing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) as a standard of care in the endourological management of renal stones. With the ever-changing landscape of RIRS over the decades shaped by technological advancements in lasers and flexible scopes, the UAS has also continuously evolved. The utility of suction in endourology has recently changed the way RIRS is performed and is a game changer for FURS outcomes. With strong clinical and experimental evidence to support its use, the UAS has undergone a transformative change in the recent past, with its ability to monitor intrarenal pressure and provide a superior vacuum-cleaner effect that improves the trifecta of RIRS, namely an improved single-stage stone-free rate (SFR), minimise complications, and reduce reinterventions. Our comprehensive review outlines the key clinical and experimental evidence and traces the developments that were key to modifying the traditional UAS into a flexible and navigable suction ureteric access sheath (FANS) and highlights how the design and modifications, in turn, influence the ability to push the boundaries of RIRS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references101

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

          Surgical Management of Stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, PART II.

          This Guideline is intended to provide a clinical framework for the surgical management of patients with kidney and/or ureteral stones. The summary presented herein represents Part II of the two-part series dedicated to Surgical Management of Stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline. Please refer to Part I for introductory information and a discussion of pre-operative imaging and special cases.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Prospective evaluation and classification of ureteral wall injuries resulting from insertion of a ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery.

            The safety of using a ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery remains controversial. Using a novel classification, we prospectively evaluated the incidence and severity of ureteral access sheath driven ureteral wall injury after flexible ureteroscopy for retrograde intrarenal surgery. Data on a total of 359 consecutive patients who underwent retrograde intrarenal surgery for kidney stone were prospectively collected at 2 academic centers. We propose what is to our knowledge a novel endoscopic classification of iatrogenic ureteral wall injury. Ureteral injuries after retrograde intrarenal surgery were assessed visually with a digital flexible ureterorenoscope. The primary outcome measure was the incidence and nature of ureteral injuries. We sought factors predisposing to such injuries. Ureteral wall injury was found in 167 patients (46.5%). Severe injury involving the smooth muscle layers was observed in 48 patients (13.3%). Males vs females (p = 0.024) and older vs younger patients (p = 0.018) were at higher risk for severe ureteral access sheath related ureteral injury. The most significant predictor of severe injury was absent ureteral Double-J® stenting before retrograde intrarenal surgery (p <0.0001). Pre-stenting vs no pre-stenting decreased the risk of severe injury by sevenfold. Body mass index, a history of diabetes mellitus, vascular disease or abdominopelvic radiation therapy and operative time were not associated with severe ureteral injury. Ureteral access sheath use for retrograde intrarenal surgery should involve systematic visual assessment of the entire ureter to recognize severe ureteral injury. The incidence of severe ureteral injury is largely decreased by preoperative Double-J stenting. Copyright © 2013 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Pressure matters: intrarenal pressures during normal and pathological conditions, and impact of increased values to renal physiology.

              To perform a review on the latest evidence related to normal and pathological intrarenal pressures (IRPs), complications of incremented values, and IRP ranges during endourology.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                DIAGC9
                Diagnostics
                Diagnostics
                MDPI AG
                2075-4418
                May 2024
                May 16 2024
                : 14
                : 10
                : 1034
                Article
                10.3390/diagnostics14101034
                38786332
                c427145b-156e-4b29-86e8-867dc54ef2df
                © 2024

                https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content534

                Cited by4

                Most referenced authors972