Clinical comparative study of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones: a retrospective case-controlled study

被引:1
|
作者
Jing, Qiang [1 ]
Liu, Fan [1 ]
Yuan, Xiaobin [1 ]
Zhang, Xuhui [1 ]
Cao, Xiaoming [1 ]
机构
[1] Shanxi Med Univ, Hosp 1, Dept Urol, 85 Jiefang South Rd, Taiyuan 030001, Shanxi, Peoples R China
来源
BMC UROLOGY | 2024年 / 24卷 / 01期
关键词
Lower pole stone; Single-use flexible ureteroscopy; Reusable flexible ureteroscopy; Efficacy; RETROGRADE INTRARENAL SURGERY; PELVICALICEAL ANATOMY; URETERORENOSCOPY; DURABILITY; MANAGEMENT; OUTCOMES; SUCCESS;
D O I
10.1186/s12894-024-01541-5
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of single-use and reusable digital flexible ureteroscopy for the treatment of lower pole stones. Methods We enrolled 135 patients underwent reusable flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) and 78 patients underwent single-use digital FURS. Demographic, clinical variables, anatomical parameters of the lower calyx and perioperative indicators were compared in the two groups. Results Thirty-six patients in the infundibuloureter angle (IPA) < 45 degrees subgroup had a mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), including 25 patients in the reusable FURS group and 11 patients in the single-use FURS group. The demographic and clinical variables in the two FURS groups were comparable. There was no statistical difference in the success rate of stone searching (P > 0.05). In terms of the success rate of lithotripsy, there was also no statistical difference in the IPA >= 45 degrees subgroup (P > 0.05), whereas single-use FURS was superior in the IPA < 45 degrees subgroup (chi 2 = 6.513, P = 0.011). The length of the working fiber in the reusable FURS and single-use FURS groups was 3.20 +/- 0.68 mm and 1.75 +/- 0.47 mm, respectively (t = 18.297, P < 0.05). The use of a stone basket in the reusable FURS (31/135, 23.0%) was significantly higher than that in the single-use FURS (8/78, 10.3%) (chi 2 = 5.336, P = 0.021). Compared with the reusable FURS group, the single-use FURS group had shorter operation times (P < 0.05) and higher stone-free rate (SFR) (chi 2 = 4.230, P = 0.040). There was no statistical difference in the intraoperative transfer of mini-PCNL and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions Single-use and reusable FURS are alternative methods for removal of lower pole stones (i.e., 2 cm or less). Single-use FURS has a high success rate of lithotripsy, shorter operation time, and high stone-free rate.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Is fluoroscopy-free single-use flexible ureteroscopy a feasible treatment for kidney stones with abnormal renal anatomy?
    Hamdy Aboutaleb
    Mohamed Sultan
    Ahmed Zaghloul
    Yasser Farahat
    Maher Gawish
    Fouad Zanaty
    Asian Journal of Urology, 2024, 11 (04) : 591 - 595
  • [22] Clinical Utility of a Single-Use Flexible Cystoscope Compared with a Standard Reusable Device: A Randomized Noninferiority Study
    Holmes, Angela
    O'Kane, Dermot
    Wombwell, Amy
    Grills, Richard
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2023, 37 (01) : 80 - 84
  • [23] Editorial Comment to Single use versus reusable digital flexible ureteroscopes: A prospective comparative study
    Hennessey, Derek B.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 26 (10) : 1005 - 1006
  • [24] Safety and feasibility of outpatient flexible ureteroscopy for urinary stones: A retrospective single-center study
    Bosquet, E.
    Peyronnet, B.
    Mathieu, R.
    Khene, Z. -E.
    Pradere, B.
    Manunta, A.
    Vincendeau, S.
    Guille, F.
    Bensalah, K.
    Verhoest, G.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2017, 27 (16): : 1043 - 1049
  • [25] Single-use digital flexible cystoscope for double J removal versus reusable instruments: a prospective, comparative study of functionality, risk of infection, and costs
    Oderda, Marco
    Asimakopoulos, Anastasios
    Batetta, Valerio
    Bosio, Andrea
    Dalmasso, Ettore
    Morra, Ivano
    Vercelli, Eugenia
    Gontero, Paolo
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 41 (11) : 3175 - 3180
  • [26] Single-use digital flexible cystoscope for double J removal versus reusable instruments: a prospective, comparative study of functionality, risk of infection, and costs
    Marco Oderda
    Anastasios Asimakopoulos
    Valerio Batetta
    Andrea Bosio
    Ettore Dalmasso
    Ivano Morra
    Eugenia Vercelli
    Paolo Gontero
    World Journal of Urology, 2023, 41 : 3175 - 3180
  • [27] WiScope® single use digital flexible ureteroscope versus reusable flexible ureteroscope for management of renal stones: a prospective randomized study
    Ahmed I. Ali
    Amr Eldakhakhny
    Abdelsalam Abdelfadel
    Mahmoud F. Rohiem
    Mohamed Elbadry
    Ali Hassan
    World Journal of Urology, 2022, 40 : 2323 - 2330
  • [28] WiScope® single use digital flexible ureteroscope versus reusable flexible ureteroscope for management of renal stones: a prospective randomized study
    Ali, Ahmed, I
    Eldakhakhny, Amr
    Abdelfadel, Abdelsalam
    Rohiem, Mahmoud F.
    Elbadry, Mohamed
    Hassan, Ali
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 40 (09) : 2323 - 2330
  • [29] REUSABLE DIGITAL FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPE VS. A SINGLE-USE FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPE IN THE TREATMENT OF UROLITHIASIS: AN EDGE CONSORTIUM PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL
    Knudsen, Bodo E.
    Posid, Tasha
    Scimeca, Alicia
    Sourial, Michael
    Wong, K. F. Victor
    Paterson, Ryan F.
    Stern, Karen L.
    Moore, Jonathan P.
    Humphreys, Mitchell R.
    Chew, Ben H.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 206 : E1127 - E1127
  • [30] A seven year cost-analysis study of reusable flexible ureteroscope use with comparative modelling for the LithoVue single-use ureteroscope
    Catterwell, R.
    Nicholson, C.
    Tempo, J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 26 : 219 - 219