The role of suction devices in enhancing outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery: a narrative review by the YAU urolithiasis and section of EAU endourology.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Mariela Corrales, Matthias Boeykens, Alba Sierra Del Rio, Eugenio Ventimiglia, Amelia Pietropaolo, Bhaskar Somani, Olivier Traxer
{"title":"The role of suction devices in enhancing outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery: a narrative review by the YAU urolithiasis and section of EAU endourology.","authors":"Mariela Corrales, Matthias Boeykens, Alba Sierra Del Rio, Eugenio Ventimiglia, Amelia Pietropaolo, Bhaskar Somani, Olivier Traxer","doi":"10.1097/MOU.0000000000001304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>To provide a comprehensive overview of existing literature on suction-assisted ureteroscopy, evaluating its effectiveness and associated complications.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A literature review was conducted in December 2024 using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus databases by two independent authors. To structure and address the clinical question, \"Do suction devices improve outcomes in RIRS?\", we employed the PICOS (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Study Type) model. Exclusion criteria included case reports, studies involving suction techniques outside the context of endocorporeal laser lithotripsy (ELL), non-English language articles and articles or clinical trials with fewer than 15 patients.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Among the 36 included studies, 28 studies focused on SUAS, of which seven specifically investigated SUAS with pressure measurement, three studies examined DISS, three studies evaluated SURE and two comparative studies analyzed different suction techniques. The presented results show that advancements in suction technology seem very promising and likely to shift endourological practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":11093,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000001304","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: To provide a comprehensive overview of existing literature on suction-assisted ureteroscopy, evaluating its effectiveness and associated complications.

Recent findings: A literature review was conducted in December 2024 using the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus databases by two independent authors. To structure and address the clinical question, "Do suction devices improve outcomes in RIRS?", we employed the PICOS (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, Study Type) model. Exclusion criteria included case reports, studies involving suction techniques outside the context of endocorporeal laser lithotripsy (ELL), non-English language articles and articles or clinical trials with fewer than 15 patients.

Summary: Among the 36 included studies, 28 studies focused on SUAS, of which seven specifically investigated SUAS with pressure measurement, three studies examined DISS, three studies evaluated SURE and two comparative studies analyzed different suction techniques. The presented results show that advancements in suction technology seem very promising and likely to shift endourological practice.

吸引装置在提高逆行肾内手术结果中的作用:由YAU尿石症和EAU泌尿外科部分的叙述性回顾。
综述目的:对现有的吸痰辅助输尿管镜相关文献进行综述,评价其疗效及相关并发症。近期发现:两位独立作者于2024年12月使用MEDLINE、EMBASE和Scopus数据库进行了文献综述。为了构建和解决“抽吸装置是否能改善RIRS的预后?”这一临床问题,我们采用PICOS(患者、干预、比较、结果、研究类型)模型。排除标准包括病例报告、涉及体外激光碎石术(ELL)以外的吸痰技术的研究、非英语文章、少于15例患者的文章或临床试验。总结:在纳入的36项研究中,28项研究聚焦于SUAS,其中7项研究专门研究了SUAS与压力测量,3项研究研究了DISS, 3项研究评估了SURE, 2项比较研究分析了不同的吸入技术。所提出的结果表明,吸痰技术的进步似乎非常有前途,并可能改变泌尿外科的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Urology
Current Opinion in Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
4.00%
发文量
140
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Urology delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in urology from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring ten key topics – including focuses on prostate cancer, bladder cancer and minimally invasive urology – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信