M.M. Abdelfatah Zaza , A. Farouk Salim , T.A. El-Mageed Salem , A. Mohammed Ezzat , M. Hassan Ali
{"title":"柔性输尿管镜检查中使用输尿管入路鞘的影响:疗效和安全性的比较研究。","authors":"M.M. Abdelfatah Zaza , A. Farouk Salim , T.A. El-Mageed Salem , A. Mohammed Ezzat , M. Hassan Ali","doi":"10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.10.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study evaluates the impact of using an access sheath (AS) during flexible ureteroscopy<span> (fURS) for urolithiasis treatment, focusing on outcomes such as stone-free rate, operation time, and complications.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This prospective, randomized study was carried out at Badr Hospital, Helwan University, and Ain Shams University hospitals from August 2021 to August 2022. Patients were systematically randomized into two groups (fURS with AS: 33 patients and without AS: 31 patients) and underwent preoperative and postoperative assessments, including lab tests and imaging. Possible procedure-associated risks, such as failed stone access, pain, bleeding, and sepsis, were monitored.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The two groups were found to be comparable in terms of demographic characteristics or preoperative stone findings (<em>p</em> > 0.05 for all). However, operation duration was shorter in the No Sheath group (79.4 ± 15.3 min vs. 90.4 ± 16.7 min in the Sheath group, <em>p</em><span> = 0.008). Intraoperative complication rates, including failed access, operation termination, ureteric injury, and bleeding, were comparable in both groups (</span><em>p</em> > 0.05). Postoperative stone-free rates (78.8% vs. 71.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.305) and mean residual stone size (2.7 ± 3.5 mm vs. 3.1 ± 3.1 mm, <em>p</em> = 0.687) showed no significant differences.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The present study suggests that fURS without an access sheath may offer an efficient and equally effective option for managing upper ureteric and renal stones. However, more studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are required to validate these findings and to establish more precise indications for this approach.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94291,"journal":{"name":"Actas urologicas espanolas","volume":"48 3","pages":"Pages 204-209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of ureteric access sheath use during flexible ureteroscopy: A comparative study on efficacy and safety\",\"authors\":\"M.M. Abdelfatah Zaza , A. Farouk Salim , T.A. El-Mageed Salem , A. Mohammed Ezzat , M. Hassan Ali\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.10.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study evaluates the impact of using an access sheath (AS) during flexible ureteroscopy<span> (fURS) for urolithiasis treatment, focusing on outcomes such as stone-free rate, operation time, and complications.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This prospective, randomized study was carried out at Badr Hospital, Helwan University, and Ain Shams University hospitals from August 2021 to August 2022. Patients were systematically randomized into two groups (fURS with AS: 33 patients and without AS: 31 patients) and underwent preoperative and postoperative assessments, including lab tests and imaging. Possible procedure-associated risks, such as failed stone access, pain, bleeding, and sepsis, were monitored.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The two groups were found to be comparable in terms of demographic characteristics or preoperative stone findings (<em>p</em> > 0.05 for all). However, operation duration was shorter in the No Sheath group (79.4 ± 15.3 min vs. 90.4 ± 16.7 min in the Sheath group, <em>p</em><span> = 0.008). Intraoperative complication rates, including failed access, operation termination, ureteric injury, and bleeding, were comparable in both groups (</span><em>p</em> > 0.05). Postoperative stone-free rates (78.8% vs. 71.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.305) and mean residual stone size (2.7 ± 3.5 mm vs. 3.1 ± 3.1 mm, <em>p</em> = 0.687) showed no significant differences.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The present study suggests that fURS without an access sheath may offer an efficient and equally effective option for managing upper ureteric and renal stones. However, more studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are required to validate these findings and to establish more precise indications for this approach.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Actas urologicas espanolas\",\"volume\":\"48 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 204-209\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Actas urologicas espanolas\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173578623001166\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Actas urologicas espanolas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173578623001166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of ureteric access sheath use during flexible ureteroscopy: A comparative study on efficacy and safety
Objectives
This study evaluates the impact of using an access sheath (AS) during flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) for urolithiasis treatment, focusing on outcomes such as stone-free rate, operation time, and complications.
Methods
This prospective, randomized study was carried out at Badr Hospital, Helwan University, and Ain Shams University hospitals from August 2021 to August 2022. Patients were systematically randomized into two groups (fURS with AS: 33 patients and without AS: 31 patients) and underwent preoperative and postoperative assessments, including lab tests and imaging. Possible procedure-associated risks, such as failed stone access, pain, bleeding, and sepsis, were monitored.
Results
The two groups were found to be comparable in terms of demographic characteristics or preoperative stone findings (p > 0.05 for all). However, operation duration was shorter in the No Sheath group (79.4 ± 15.3 min vs. 90.4 ± 16.7 min in the Sheath group, p = 0.008). Intraoperative complication rates, including failed access, operation termination, ureteric injury, and bleeding, were comparable in both groups (p > 0.05). Postoperative stone-free rates (78.8% vs. 71.0%, p = 0.305) and mean residual stone size (2.7 ± 3.5 mm vs. 3.1 ± 3.1 mm, p = 0.687) showed no significant differences.
Conclusions
The present study suggests that fURS without an access sheath may offer an efficient and equally effective option for managing upper ureteric and renal stones. However, more studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are required to validate these findings and to establish more precise indications for this approach.