Chen Yang, Huang Haiwen, Zeng Xue, Ding Tianfu, Lin Shen, Xiao Bo, Li Jianxing
{"title":"输尿管静脉透明导尿管:输尿管镜碎石治疗输尿管结石的新前沿。","authors":"Chen Yang, Huang Haiwen, Zeng Xue, Ding Tianfu, Lin Shen, Xiao Bo, Li Jianxing","doi":"10.1007/s00240-025-01769-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Conventional semirigid ureteroscopy for ureteral stones faces challenges such as stone retropulsion, poor intraoperative vision, and elevated intrarenal pressure. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of a novel multi-channel negative pressure suction catheter (UreteroPyeloVisClear Catheter, VCC) in ureteroscopic lithotripsy. To compare the performance of VCC with conventional rigid ureteroscopy, this study evaluated operative time, stone clearance rates, and complication incidence between VCC and traditional semirigid ureteroscopy. A prospective cohort study included 42 patients with ureteral stones (diameter ≤ 2.0 cm), randomized into VCC (n = 21) and traditional (n = 21) groups. The VCC group utilized an integrated negative pressure suction and active water circulation system, while the traditional group used standard semirigid ureteroscopy. The primary outcome was operative time, with secondary outcomes including stone clearance rates, retropulsion incidence, basket utilization, and complication rates. The VCC group demonstrated significantly shorter operative time (39.95 ± 10.24 vs. 53.00 ± 26.95 min, p = 0.001) and reduced basket utilization (5% vs. 57%, p < 0.001). Stone retropulsion rates were lower in the VCC group (5% vs. 14%, p = 0.294), though not statistically significant. Both groups achieved 100% stone-free rates at 1 month. Postoperative pain scores (VCC: 0.90 ± 1.36 vs. traditional: 1.24 ± 1.49) and complication rates (0% vs. 5%) showed no significant differences. The VCC significantly reduces operative time and reliance on auxiliary instruments while maintaining safety and stone-free outcomes. Its innovative design addresses key limitations of traditional ureteroscopy, offering a promising advancement for ureteral stone management.</p>","PeriodicalId":23411,"journal":{"name":"Urolithiasis","volume":"53 1","pages":"97"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"UreteroPyeloVisClear catheter: a new frontier in ureteroscopic lithotripsy for ureteral stones.\",\"authors\":\"Chen Yang, Huang Haiwen, Zeng Xue, Ding Tianfu, Lin Shen, Xiao Bo, Li Jianxing\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00240-025-01769-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Conventional semirigid ureteroscopy for ureteral stones faces challenges such as stone retropulsion, poor intraoperative vision, and elevated intrarenal pressure. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of a novel multi-channel negative pressure suction catheter (UreteroPyeloVisClear Catheter, VCC) in ureteroscopic lithotripsy. To compare the performance of VCC with conventional rigid ureteroscopy, this study evaluated operative time, stone clearance rates, and complication incidence between VCC and traditional semirigid ureteroscopy. A prospective cohort study included 42 patients with ureteral stones (diameter ≤ 2.0 cm), randomized into VCC (n = 21) and traditional (n = 21) groups. The VCC group utilized an integrated negative pressure suction and active water circulation system, while the traditional group used standard semirigid ureteroscopy. The primary outcome was operative time, with secondary outcomes including stone clearance rates, retropulsion incidence, basket utilization, and complication rates. The VCC group demonstrated significantly shorter operative time (39.95 ± 10.24 vs. 53.00 ± 26.95 min, p = 0.001) and reduced basket utilization (5% vs. 57%, p < 0.001). Stone retropulsion rates were lower in the VCC group (5% vs. 14%, p = 0.294), though not statistically significant. Both groups achieved 100% stone-free rates at 1 month. Postoperative pain scores (VCC: 0.90 ± 1.36 vs. traditional: 1.24 ± 1.49) and complication rates (0% vs. 5%) showed no significant differences. The VCC significantly reduces operative time and reliance on auxiliary instruments while maintaining safety and stone-free outcomes. Its innovative design addresses key limitations of traditional ureteroscopy, offering a promising advancement for ureteral stone management.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Urolithiasis\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"97\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Urolithiasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-025-01769-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urolithiasis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-025-01769-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
UreteroPyeloVisClear catheter: a new frontier in ureteroscopic lithotripsy for ureteral stones.
Conventional semirigid ureteroscopy for ureteral stones faces challenges such as stone retropulsion, poor intraoperative vision, and elevated intrarenal pressure. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of a novel multi-channel negative pressure suction catheter (UreteroPyeloVisClear Catheter, VCC) in ureteroscopic lithotripsy. To compare the performance of VCC with conventional rigid ureteroscopy, this study evaluated operative time, stone clearance rates, and complication incidence between VCC and traditional semirigid ureteroscopy. A prospective cohort study included 42 patients with ureteral stones (diameter ≤ 2.0 cm), randomized into VCC (n = 21) and traditional (n = 21) groups. The VCC group utilized an integrated negative pressure suction and active water circulation system, while the traditional group used standard semirigid ureteroscopy. The primary outcome was operative time, with secondary outcomes including stone clearance rates, retropulsion incidence, basket utilization, and complication rates. The VCC group demonstrated significantly shorter operative time (39.95 ± 10.24 vs. 53.00 ± 26.95 min, p = 0.001) and reduced basket utilization (5% vs. 57%, p < 0.001). Stone retropulsion rates were lower in the VCC group (5% vs. 14%, p = 0.294), though not statistically significant. Both groups achieved 100% stone-free rates at 1 month. Postoperative pain scores (VCC: 0.90 ± 1.36 vs. traditional: 1.24 ± 1.49) and complication rates (0% vs. 5%) showed no significant differences. The VCC significantly reduces operative time and reliance on auxiliary instruments while maintaining safety and stone-free outcomes. Its innovative design addresses key limitations of traditional ureteroscopy, offering a promising advancement for ureteral stone management.
期刊介绍:
Official Journal of the International Urolithiasis Society
The journal aims to publish original articles in the fields of clinical and experimental investigation only within the sphere of urolithiasis and its related areas of research. The journal covers all aspects of urolithiasis research including the diagnosis, epidemiology, pathogenesis, genetics, clinical biochemistry, open and non-invasive surgical intervention, nephrological investigation, chemistry and prophylaxis of the disorder. The Editor welcomes contributions on topics of interest to urologists, nephrologists, radiologists, clinical biochemists, epidemiologists, nutritionists, basic scientists and nurses working in that field.
Contributions may be submitted as full-length articles or as rapid communications in the form of Letters to the Editor. Articles should be original and should contain important new findings from carefully conducted studies designed to produce statistically significant data. Please note that we no longer publish articles classified as Case Reports. Editorials and review articles may be published by invitation from the Editorial Board. All submissions are peer-reviewed. Through an electronic system for the submission and review of manuscripts, the Editor and Associate Editors aim to make publication accessible as quickly as possible to a large number of readers throughout the world.