Literature DB >> 24676566

Use of flexible ureteroscopy in the clinical practice for the treatment of renal stones: results from a large European survey conducted by the EAU Young Academic Urologists-Working Party on Endourology and Urolithiasis.

F Sanguedolce1, E Liatsikos, P Verze, S Hruby, A Breda, J D Beatty, T Knoll.   

Abstract

Treatment of renal stones using flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) is increasingly common despite the poor evidence in literature supporting its use and indications. With this study, we wanted to investigate the current use and indication of fURS for the treatment of renal stones in the clinical practice across the European countries. A survey was conducted using an emailed questionnaire consisting of 21 items; 2,894 recipients were selected via the EAU membership database. The questionnaires were collected through the SurveyMonkey system and the data were processed with the SPSS statistical package. Frequencies, cross tabs and Pearson correlation coefficients were applied as appropriate. 1,168 questionnaires were collected (response rate 40.4%). fURS was performed in 72.9% of the respondents' institutions, and 54.2% of the respondents were performing the procedure. For 95% of the users, fURS was considered first-line treatment, for stone of lower pole stone (45.9%) and <1 cm (44.2%) and 2 cm (43.8%) in size. The ureteral access sheaths were used routinely by more than 70% of the respondents. Lower pole stone repositioning technique was routinely performed by 45.9% of the surgeons. After fragmentation, 47.2% of the responders preferred to retrieve only the bigger fragments. At the end of fURS, lower volume surgeons were more likely to place routinely a double-J stent (p = 0.001). Higher volume surgeons estimated a higher durability of devices, both optical and digital ones (p < 0.001), and were more prone to consider fURS cost-effective when compared to other treatment modalities (p < 0.001). fURS is widely used for the treatment of renal stones and its use and indication can vary according to the age and surgeons' case volume. Higher volume surgeons are more prompt to extend international guidelines indications and to consider the technology cost-effective.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24676566     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-014-0659-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urolithiasis        ISSN: 2194-7228            Impact factor:   3.436


  23 in total

1.  New-generation flexible ureterorenoscopes are more durable than previous ones.

Authors:  Olivier Traxer; Francis Dubosq; Karim Jamali; Bernard Gattegno; Philippe Thibault
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 2.649

2.  Flexible ureterorenoscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy for the management of renal stone burdens that measure 2 to 3 cm: a multi-institutional experience.

Authors:  Elias S Hyams; Ravi Munver; Vincent G Bird; Jayant Uberoi; Ojas Shah
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.942

3.  Flexible ureteroscopy in conjunction with in situ lithotripsy for lower pole calculi.

Authors:  B K Hollenbeck; T G Schuster; G J Faerber; J S Wolf
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Trends in hypospadias surgery: results of a worldwide survey.

Authors:  Alexander Springer; Wilfried Krois; Ernst Horcher
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-08-22       Impact factor: 20.096

5.  Ureteroscopic versus percutaneous treatment for medium-size (1-2-cm) renal calculi.

Authors:  Benjamin I Chung; Monish Aron; Nicholas J Hegarty; Mihir M Desai
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.942

6.  Retrograde ureteroscopy for renal stones larger than 2.5 cm.

Authors:  Julie M Riley; Laura Stearman; Scott Troxel
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.942

7.  Ureteral access sheath provides protection against elevated renal pressures during routine flexible ureteroscopic stone manipulation.

Authors:  Brian K Auge; Paul K Pietrow; Costas D Lallas; Ganesh V Raj; Robert W Santa-Cruz; Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.942

8.  Durability of the next-generation flexible fiberoptic ureteroscopes: a randomized prospective multi-institutional clinical trial.

Authors:  Bodo Knudsen; Ricardo Miyaoka; Ketul Shah; Timothy Holden; Thomas M T Turk; Renato N Pedro; Carly Kriedberg; Bryan Hinck; Omar Ortiz-Alvarado; Manoj Monga
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-10-24       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  Assessment of stricture formation with the ureteral access sheath.

Authors:  Fernando C Delvecchio; Brian K Auge; Ricardo M Brizuela; Alon Z Weizer; Ari D Silverstein; Costas D Lallas; Paul K Pietrow; David M Albala; Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.649

10.  Single-session ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy for multiple stones.

Authors:  Ryoji Takazawa; Sachi Kitayama; Toshihiko Tsujii
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 3.369

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  What is the stone-free rate following flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stones?

Authors:  Khurshid R Ghani; J Stuart Wolf; J Stuart Wolf
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  Flexible ureteroscopy: Technological advancements, current indications and outcomes in the treatment of urolithiasis.

Authors:  Husain Alenezi; John D Denstedt
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2015-06-23

3.  Impact of case volume per year on flexible Ureteroscopy practice: an internet based survey.

Authors:  Omar Alhunaidi; Abdulrahman A Ahmad; Ahmed R El-Nahas; Bader Akroof; Ali Alamiri; Feras Al-Ajrawi; Abdullatif Al-Terki; Mohamed El-Shazly
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 2.264

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.