MyMedR

Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Multicenter outcome analysis of different sheath sizes for Flexible and Navigable Suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) ureteroscopy: an EAU Endourology collaboration with the global FANS study group

Kwok JL, Somani B, Sarica K, Yuen SKK, Zawadzki M, Castellani D, et al.

Urolithiasis, 2024 Nov 15;52(1):162.
PMID: 39545972 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-024-01662-4

Flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) is a potential game changer in flexible ureteroscopy (FURS). The influence of sheath size on outcomes needs research. The primary aim was to analyze 30-day single stage stone free status (SFS), zero fragment rate (ZFR) and complications when using 10/12Fr sheaths vis a vis other sheath sizes. The global FANS research group published the 30-day outcomes in patients who underwent FANS and reasoned this can be a potential game changer. We included 295 patients from this anonymized dataset with division into two groups: Group 1 (Smaller sheath) - 10/12Fr FANS, and Group 2 (Larger sheath) - 11/13Fr or 12/14Fr sheaths. Stone volume was similar between both groups (median 1320 mm3, p = 0.88). Ureteroscopy and total operative time was longer in the smaller sheath group (35 vs. 32 min, p = 0.02 and 50 vs. 45 min, p = 0.001, respectively). While 30-day computed tomography SFS (100% stone free or single residual fragment ≤ 2 mm) were not significantly different (96% vs. 95%, p > 0.99), ZFR (100% stone-free) was better with smaller sheaths (68% vs. 53%, p = 0.02). There was no difference in postoperative complication rates, and no sepsis in both groups. Urologists should consider individualizing appropriate sheath size in normal adult kidneys. Sheath size did not affect complication rates, risk of perioperative injury to the pelvicalyceal system or ureteric injury, but smaller FANS sheaths had similar high SFS. The ZFR with smaller sheaths was better, but this needs to be validated. These smaller sheath outcomes need to be balanced with longer ureteroscopy time, operative time, reach to the lower pole, ease of suction and visibility during lithotripsy. Large volume studies in different types of pelvicalyceal anatomy can determine if indeed smaller FANS is the best choice in FURS.
Comparing thulium fiber versus high power holmium laser in bilateral same sitting retrograde intrarenal surgery for kidney stones: Results from a multicenter study

Chai CA, Inoue T, Somani BK, Yuen SKK, Ragoori D, Gadzhiev N, et al.

Investig Clin Urol, 2024 Sep;65(5):451-458.
PMID: 39249917 DOI: 10.4111/icu.20240185

PURPOSE: Traditionally, bilateral urolithiasis treatment involved staged interventions due to safety concerns. Recent studies have shown that same-sitting bilateral retrograde intrarenal surgery (SSB-RIRS) is effective, with acceptable complication rates. However, there's no clear data on the optimum laser for the procedure. This study aimed to assess outcomes of SSB-RIRS comparing thulium fiber laser (TFL) and high-power holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser in a multicenter real-world practice.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing SSB-RIRS from January 2015 to June 2022 across 21 centers worldwide. Three months perioperative and postoperative outcomes were recorded, focusing on complications and stone-free rates (SFR).
RESULTS: A total of 733 patients were included, with 415 in group 1 (Ho:YAG) and 318 in group 2 (TFL). Both groups have similar demographic and stone characteristics. Group 1 had more incidence of symptomatic pain or hematuria (26.5% vs. 10.4%). Operation and lasing times were comparable. The use of baskets was higher in group 1 (47.2% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001). Postoperative complications and length of hospital stay were similar. Group 2 had a higher overall SFR. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that age, presence of stone at the lower pole, and stone diameter were associated with lower odds of being stone-free bilaterally, while TFL was associated with higher odds.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that urologists use both lasers equally for SSB-RIRS. Reintervention rates are low, safety profiles are comparable, and single-stage bilateral SFR may be better in certain cases. Bilateral lower pole and large-volume stones have higher chances of residual fragments.

Filters

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links