Mehmet Fatih Şahin, Hulusi Sıtkı Dayısoylu, Cenk Murat Yazıcı, Duygu Sıddıkoğlu, Önder Çınar, Murat Akgül, Hakan Çakır, Cem Başataç, Oktay Özman, Muhammet Fatih Şimşekoğlu, Kerem Teke, Mustafa Bilal Tuna, Eyüp Burak Sancak, Barbaros Başeskioğlu, Bülent Önal, Haluk Akpınar
{"title":"可重复使用输尿管镜与一次性输尿管镜的疗效和安全性比较:RIRSearch多中心研究组病例对照匹配结果。","authors":"Mehmet Fatih Şahin, Hulusi Sıtkı Dayısoylu, Cenk Murat Yazıcı, Duygu Sıddıkoğlu, Önder Çınar, Murat Akgül, Hakan Çakır, Cem Başataç, Oktay Özman, Muhammet Fatih Şimşekoğlu, Kerem Teke, Mustafa Bilal Tuna, Eyüp Burak Sancak, Barbaros Başeskioğlu, Bülent Önal, Haluk Akpınar","doi":"10.1007/s11255-025-04545-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Today, disposable flexible ureteroscopes are increasingly used in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) as an alternative to reusable flexible ureteroscopes. The comparison of the safety and effectiveness of these two devices is still a matter of debate. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of disposable-flexible ureteroscopes vs reusable flexible ureteroscopes in RIRS.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study included 1165 RIRS cases, and the patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of cases with reusable RIRS, 838 in total, while Group 2 consisted of disposable RIRS cases, 327 in total. Due to significant differences, case-control matching was performed, and subsequently, there were 229 patients in both groups. The demographic and clinical data of patients, stone characteristics, surgical data, perioperative and postoperative complications, postoperative urinary tract infection rate, duration of hospitalization, and stone-free rates (SFR) were analyzed and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No demographic differences were observed between the two groups after case-control matching. While operative time, SFR, and postoperative infection rates were similar between the groups (p > 0.05), fluoroscopy (p = 0.001) and hospitalization (p = 0.029) times were statistically significantly lower in the disposable ureteroscopy group. Perioperative and postoperative complications were also lower in this group (p = 0.018 and p = 0.001 respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our research indicates that single-use ureteroscopes are a strong alternative to reusable ureteroscopes, demonstrating similar efficacy and reduced complication rates in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The comparison of efficacy and safety of reusable and disposable-flexible ureteroscopes: case-control matching results of multicentric RIRSearch study group.\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet Fatih Şahin, Hulusi Sıtkı Dayısoylu, Cenk Murat Yazıcı, Duygu Sıddıkoğlu, Önder Çınar, Murat Akgül, Hakan Çakır, Cem Başataç, Oktay Özman, Muhammet Fatih Şimşekoğlu, Kerem Teke, Mustafa Bilal Tuna, Eyüp Burak Sancak, Barbaros Başeskioğlu, Bülent Önal, Haluk Akpınar\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11255-025-04545-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Today, disposable flexible ureteroscopes are increasingly used in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) as an alternative to reusable flexible ureteroscopes. The comparison of the safety and effectiveness of these two devices is still a matter of debate. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of disposable-flexible ureteroscopes vs reusable flexible ureteroscopes in RIRS.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study included 1165 RIRS cases, and the patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of cases with reusable RIRS, 838 in total, while Group 2 consisted of disposable RIRS cases, 327 in total. Due to significant differences, case-control matching was performed, and subsequently, there were 229 patients in both groups. The demographic and clinical data of patients, stone characteristics, surgical data, perioperative and postoperative complications, postoperative urinary tract infection rate, duration of hospitalization, and stone-free rates (SFR) were analyzed and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No demographic differences were observed between the two groups after case-control matching. While operative time, SFR, and postoperative infection rates were similar between the groups (p > 0.05), fluoroscopy (p = 0.001) and hospitalization (p = 0.029) times were statistically significantly lower in the disposable ureteroscopy group. Perioperative and postoperative complications were also lower in this group (p = 0.018 and p = 0.001 respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our research indicates that single-use ureteroscopes are a strong alternative to reusable ureteroscopes, demonstrating similar efficacy and reduced complication rates in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14454,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Urology and Nephrology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Urology and Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-025-04545-8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-025-04545-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The comparison of efficacy and safety of reusable and disposable-flexible ureteroscopes: case-control matching results of multicentric RIRSearch study group.
Purpose: Today, disposable flexible ureteroscopes are increasingly used in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) as an alternative to reusable flexible ureteroscopes. The comparison of the safety and effectiveness of these two devices is still a matter of debate. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of disposable-flexible ureteroscopes vs reusable flexible ureteroscopes in RIRS.
Materials and methods: The study included 1165 RIRS cases, and the patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of cases with reusable RIRS, 838 in total, while Group 2 consisted of disposable RIRS cases, 327 in total. Due to significant differences, case-control matching was performed, and subsequently, there were 229 patients in both groups. The demographic and clinical data of patients, stone characteristics, surgical data, perioperative and postoperative complications, postoperative urinary tract infection rate, duration of hospitalization, and stone-free rates (SFR) were analyzed and compared.
Results: No demographic differences were observed between the two groups after case-control matching. While operative time, SFR, and postoperative infection rates were similar between the groups (p > 0.05), fluoroscopy (p = 0.001) and hospitalization (p = 0.029) times were statistically significantly lower in the disposable ureteroscopy group. Perioperative and postoperative complications were also lower in this group (p = 0.018 and p = 0.001 respectively).
Conclusion: Our research indicates that single-use ureteroscopes are a strong alternative to reusable ureteroscopes, demonstrating similar efficacy and reduced complication rates in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones.
期刊介绍:
International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.