{"title":"7.5Fr 微型柔性输尿管镜在 RIRS 中的应用:多中心随机对照试验的初步结果。","authors":"Wen Zhong, Wei Zhu, Zhijian Zhao, Banghua Liao, Haixing Mai, Changwei Liu, Kunjie Wang, Xu Zhang, Changbao Xu, Guohua Zeng","doi":"10.1089/end.2023.0540","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> To report the initial results of an randomized clinical trail comparing the safety and efficacy between 7.5F and 9.2F flexible ureteroscope (FUS) in the management of renal calculi <2 cm. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> Eighty patients were enrolled and received retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with a different size FUS. The operation results and complications were compared. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Two cases in the 7.5F group and four cases in the 9.2F group failed to insert the 12/14F ureteral access sheath (UAS), respectively, and no significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.396) was noted. However, 10/12F UAS was inserted in the 7.5F group, but not available in the 9.2F group, and thus, the 10/12F UAS inserting rate in the 7.5F group was higher than in the 9.2F group (100% <i>vs</i> 0%, <i>p</i> = 0.014), and the UAS insertion failure rate in 9.2F group was higher than in the 7.5F group (10% <i>vs</i> 0%, <i>p</i> = 0.040). The operation time in 7.5F group was shorter than the 9.2F group (35.60 ± 7.86 <i>vs</i> 41.05 ± 8.14, <i>p</i> = 0.003). Less irrigation was required in 7.5F group (813.93 ± 279.47 mL <i>vs</i> 1504.18 ± 385.31 mL, <i>p</i> = 0.000). The postoperative fever rate in 9.2F group was higher than 7.5F group (20% <i>vs</i> 5%, <i>p</i> = 0.043). There was no significant difference in sepsis (0% <i>vs</i> 2.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.314) between the two groups. No significant difference was noted in hospital stay (0.93 ± 0.49 days <i>vs</i> 1.14 ± 0.64 days, <i>p</i> = 0.099) between the two groups. The final stone-free rate (SFR) in 7.5F group was higher than 9.2F group (95% <i>vs</i> 80%, <i>p</i> = 0.043). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The latest 7.5F mini FUS was a reliable instrument in RIRS to keep a good visualization with low requirement of irrigation, low postoperative infection complication, and also a high SFR when compared with the conventional 9.2F FUS. <b><i>Clinical Trial Registration:</i></b> NCT05231577.</p>","PeriodicalId":15723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endourology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"7.5F Mini Flexible Ureteroscope in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Initial Results from a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Wen Zhong, Wei Zhu, Zhijian Zhao, Banghua Liao, Haixing Mai, Changwei Liu, Kunjie Wang, Xu Zhang, Changbao Xu, Guohua Zeng\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/end.2023.0540\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Objective:</i></b> To report the initial results of an randomized clinical trail comparing the safety and efficacy between 7.5F and 9.2F flexible ureteroscope (FUS) in the management of renal calculi <2 cm. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> Eighty patients were enrolled and received retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with a different size FUS. The operation results and complications were compared. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Two cases in the 7.5F group and four cases in the 9.2F group failed to insert the 12/14F ureteral access sheath (UAS), respectively, and no significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.396) was noted. However, 10/12F UAS was inserted in the 7.5F group, but not available in the 9.2F group, and thus, the 10/12F UAS inserting rate in the 7.5F group was higher than in the 9.2F group (100% <i>vs</i> 0%, <i>p</i> = 0.014), and the UAS insertion failure rate in 9.2F group was higher than in the 7.5F group (10% <i>vs</i> 0%, <i>p</i> = 0.040). The operation time in 7.5F group was shorter than the 9.2F group (35.60 ± 7.86 <i>vs</i> 41.05 ± 8.14, <i>p</i> = 0.003). Less irrigation was required in 7.5F group (813.93 ± 279.47 mL <i>vs</i> 1504.18 ± 385.31 mL, <i>p</i> = 0.000). The postoperative fever rate in 9.2F group was higher than 7.5F group (20% <i>vs</i> 5%, <i>p</i> = 0.043). There was no significant difference in sepsis (0% <i>vs</i> 2.5%, <i>p</i> = 0.314) between the two groups. No significant difference was noted in hospital stay (0.93 ± 0.49 days <i>vs</i> 1.14 ± 0.64 days, <i>p</i> = 0.099) between the two groups. The final stone-free rate (SFR) in 7.5F group was higher than 9.2F group (95% <i>vs</i> 80%, <i>p</i> = 0.043). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The latest 7.5F mini FUS was a reliable instrument in RIRS to keep a good visualization with low requirement of irrigation, low postoperative infection complication, and also a high SFR when compared with the conventional 9.2F FUS. <b><i>Clinical Trial Registration:</i></b> NCT05231577.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15723,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of endourology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of endourology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2023.0540\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endourology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2023.0540","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
7.5F Mini Flexible Ureteroscope in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Initial Results from a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.
Objective: To report the initial results of an randomized clinical trail comparing the safety and efficacy between 7.5F and 9.2F flexible ureteroscope (FUS) in the management of renal calculi <2 cm. Materials and Methods: Eighty patients were enrolled and received retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with a different size FUS. The operation results and complications were compared. Results: Two cases in the 7.5F group and four cases in the 9.2F group failed to insert the 12/14F ureteral access sheath (UAS), respectively, and no significant difference (p = 0.396) was noted. However, 10/12F UAS was inserted in the 7.5F group, but not available in the 9.2F group, and thus, the 10/12F UAS inserting rate in the 7.5F group was higher than in the 9.2F group (100% vs 0%, p = 0.014), and the UAS insertion failure rate in 9.2F group was higher than in the 7.5F group (10% vs 0%, p = 0.040). The operation time in 7.5F group was shorter than the 9.2F group (35.60 ± 7.86 vs 41.05 ± 8.14, p = 0.003). Less irrigation was required in 7.5F group (813.93 ± 279.47 mL vs 1504.18 ± 385.31 mL, p = 0.000). The postoperative fever rate in 9.2F group was higher than 7.5F group (20% vs 5%, p = 0.043). There was no significant difference in sepsis (0% vs 2.5%, p = 0.314) between the two groups. No significant difference was noted in hospital stay (0.93 ± 0.49 days vs 1.14 ± 0.64 days, p = 0.099) between the two groups. The final stone-free rate (SFR) in 7.5F group was higher than 9.2F group (95% vs 80%, p = 0.043). Conclusion: The latest 7.5F mini FUS was a reliable instrument in RIRS to keep a good visualization with low requirement of irrigation, low postoperative infection complication, and also a high SFR when compared with the conventional 9.2F FUS. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT05231577.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Endourology, JE Case Reports, and Videourology are the leading peer-reviewed journal, case reports publication, and innovative videojournal companion covering all aspects of minimally invasive urology research, applications, and clinical outcomes.
The leading journal of minimally invasive urology for over 30 years, Journal of Endourology is the essential publication for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest surgical technologies in endoscopic, laparoscopic, robotic, and image-guided procedures as they apply to benign and malignant diseases of the genitourinary tract. This flagship journal includes the companion videojournal Videourology™ with every subscription. While Journal of Endourology remains focused on publishing rigorously peer reviewed articles, Videourology accepts original videos containing material that has not been reported elsewhere, except in the form of an abstract or a conference presentation.
Journal of Endourology coverage includes:
The latest laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic, and image-guided techniques for treating both benign and malignant conditions
Pioneering research articles
Controversial cases in endourology
Techniques in endourology with accompanying videos
Reviews and epochs in endourology
Endourology survey section of endourology relevant manuscripts published in other journals.