Background and Objectives: This paper evaluates the efficacy and safety of ureteral access sheath (UAS) utilization in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Materials and Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to 30 August 2023. The inclusion criteria comprised English-language original studies on RIRS with or without UAS in humans. The primary outcome was SFR, while the secondary outcomes included intraoperative and postoperative complications, the lengths of the operation and the hospitalization period, and the duration of the fluoroscopy. Subgroup analyses and a sensitivity analysis were performed. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots and Egger\'s regression tests. Dichotomous variables were analyzed using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), while mean differences (MDs) were employed for continuous variables. Results: We included 22 studies in our analysis. These spanned 2001 to 2023, involving 12,993 patients and 13,293 procedures. No significant difference in SFR was observed between the UAS and non-UAS groups (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.63-1.30, p = 0.59). Intraoperative (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.75-1.69, p = 0.5) and postoperative complications (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.89-1.87, p = 0.18) did not significantly differ between the groups. UAS usage increased operation times (MD = 8.30, 95% CI 2.51-14.10, p = 0.005) and fluoroscopy times (MD = 5.73, 95% CI 4.55-6.90, p < 0.001). No publication bias was detected for any outcome. Conclusions: In RIRS, UAS usage did not significantly affect SFR, complications, or hospitalization time. However, it increased operation time and fluoroscopy time. Routine UAS usage is not supported, and decisions should be patient-specific. Further studies with larger sample sizes and standardized assessments are needed to refine UAS utilization in RIRS.

The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of transperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (TPLU), retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (R-fURS), and mini-percutaneous antegrade flexible ureteroscopy (A-fURS) for treating large (≥ 15 mm) impacted proximal ureteral stones. A total of 105 adult patients were randomized into 3 equal groups: group A (35) patients underwent TPLU, group B (35) patients underwent R-fURS, and group C (35) patients underwent A-fURS. The initial stone-free rate was 100%, 68.6%, and 80% in groups A, B, and C, respectively. The mean operative time (OT) was (85.0 ± 7.57 min) in group A, (61.0 ± 8.21 min) in group B, and (89.57 ± 15.12 min) in group C. The three groups were comparable concerning the overall complications. R-fURS is a less invasive modality for treating such stones; however, it is associated with a lower SFR and a higher rate of auxiliary procedures. Both TPLU and miniperc A-fURS are effective and valuable alternatives for treating large impacted proximal ureteric stones.

Background Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is considered a standard treatment option for large-size renal stones but is associated with drawbacks such as bleeding and prolonged recovery. Mini-PCNL offers a less invasive alternative, but its efficacy compared to standard PCNL for renal stones larger than 2 cm remains under debate. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of standard PCNL versus mini-PCNL for renal stone sizes more than 2 cm. Methods This single-centre prospective interventional study will be conducted at Acharya Vinoba Bhave Rural Hospital (AVBRH). The study will include patients 18 to 70 years of age undergoing unilateral PCNL for renal calculi. Patients with renal stones larger than 2 cm will be enrolled. Data on stone-free rate (SFR), operative duration, hospital stay time, surgical site infection, haemoglobin (Hb) drop, need for blood transfusion, and post-surgery fever will be collected and compared between the two procedures. Statistical analysis of data will be performed using descriptive and analytical statistics. Results The study aims to enrol a total of 32 patients. Data analysis will be done using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24 (Released 2016; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York). Conclusion This study will provide valuable insights into the comparative outcome in terms of efficacy and safety of standard PCNL and mini-PCNL for kidney stones larger than 2 cm.

BACKGROUND: Lithiasis is a common and recurrent disease. Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) is the cornerstone of laser treatment of kidney stones. Kidney stones destruction requires its laser pulverization into small fragments in order to remove them through the ureter or improve their spontaneous expulsion along the urinary tract. However, most of the time, all the micro-fragments and dust created cannot be extracted using our surgical tools and may stay intra-renally at the end of the procedure. Adjuvant treatments (such as forced diuresis, inversion or mechanical pressure) were previously described to improve the expulsion of stone fragments after extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Nevertheless, the impact of adjuvant treatment after fURS remains unclear and mainly theoretical.
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective is to show that the injection of 40 mg of furosemide in slow intravenous during 10 min, after the procedure, increases the stone-free rate 3 months after a fURS for destruction of kidney stones with laser.
METHODS: The study will be a two-parallel group randomized, controlled, multicentric trial with a blinding evaluation. Nine French departments of urology will participate. Patients will be randomized in 2 groups: the experimental group (injection of 40 mg of furosemide at the end of the surgery) and a control one (usual care). Patients will be followed up for 3 months (± 2 weeks) after the surgery. Then, we will perform a low dose abdomino-pelvic CT scan. The primary outcome is the stone-free rate at 3 months. A centralized review of the images will be performed by two specialized radiologists, in a blind and crossed way to allow a homogenization of the results. The secondary outcomes will include the rate of early post-operative urinary tract infection (UTI), the evaluation of post-operative pain, and the safety of the use of furosemide in patients treated by fURS for renal stone laser destruction. As secondary objectives, it is also planned to look at the effect of the prescription of an alpha-blocker as usual treatment on stone-free rate and to assess the agreement between the imaging analysis of the urologist and the specialized radiologist.
CONCLUSIONS: Lithiasis is a public health problem. It affects about 10% of the general population. This prevalence is increasing (multiplied by 3 in 40 years), partly due to changes in the population\'s eating habits over the years. The lithiasis patient is a patient with a chronic disease requiring annual follow-up and who may suffer from multiple recurrences, with a recurrence rate at 5 years of 50%. Recurrences are partly due to residual fragments left in the kidneys at the end of the operation. Other risk factors for recurrence include dietary hygiene and the presence of an associated metabolic disease. The metabolic blood and urine tests recommended by the Association Française d\'Urologie (AFU) can be used to manage these last two problems. As far as residual fragments are concerned, their presence leads to an early recurrence of stones because they form the bed for a new aggregation of crystals in the kidneys. Being able to reduce the rate of residual fragments in patients with the use of furosemide at the end of the intervention therefore seems essential in the management of recurrences in our patients. This will also improve our patients\' quality of life. Indeed, lithiasis disease leads to chronic pain associated with acute pain that motivates consultations to the emergency for specialized management. This study is the first to evaluate the impact of forced diuresis with the use of furosemide on the stone-free rate after a fURS for destruction of kidney stone with laser.
BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05916963 , first received: 22 June 2023. EU Clinical Trials Register EudraCT Number: 2022-502890-40-00.

Aim The study aimed to evaluate the predictive factors that determined stone-free rate (SFR) after retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Materials and methods This prospective study was conducted on 183 patients undergoing RIRS for renal stones. Patients were categorized into two groups, depending on stone-free status one month following the procedure. SFR was defined as the complete absence of stones or stones <4 mm. The parameters studied included patient demographics, presence of hydronephrosis, presence of preoperative double J-stent, abnormal renal anatomy, and stone characteristics (stone burden, stone number, stone density, stone location, lower pole infundibulopelvic angle, and lower pole renal infundibular length (RIL)). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for residual stones. We assessed the predictive ability of the RIRS score and Resorlu-Unsal stone score (RUSS) for evaluating SFR utilizing receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results 183 patients were included in the study with a median age of 51 years. 131 (71.6%) patients were declared stone-free after the procedure. The mean stone size and density were 16.9 SD±7.5 mm and 1038 SD±342 Hounsfield units (HU) respectively. Stone-free patients had lower stone size (14.3 mm vs. 23.6 mm, p<0.01) and stone density (970 HU vs. 1211 HU, p<0.01) compared to non-stone-free patients. Patients with residual stones had steeper lower pole renal infundibulopelvic angle (RIPA) (31.3° vs. 40.7°, p<0.01) and longer RIL (26.6 mm vs. 21.1 mm, p<0.01). Stone multiplicity (p<0.01), lower pole stone location (p<0.01), and renal malformations (p<0.01) were significant influencing factors for residual renal stones after RIRS. Multivariate analysis revealed stone size, stone density (HU), and stone location as independent predictors for SFR after RIRS. Among the scoring systems, the RIRS score had the highest diagnostic accuracy for SFR (area under the curve (AUC): -0.882, 95% CI-0.828-0.936). Conclusion Stone size, stone density (HU), and stone number are important predictors of SFR after RIRS. Lower pole stone location and abnormal renal anatomy play a substantial role in determining SFR after RIRS. In lower pole stones, a long RIL and acute RIPA negatively influence SFR. Additionally, the RIRS score was found to be a better predictor for SFR than the RUSS score.

Background Renal calculi therapy has advanced significantly in recent years, with mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) emerging as a minimally invasive treatment modality. Mini-PCNL has been subjected to several modifications to achieve the best possible outcomes and reduce morbidity. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of Swiss LithoClast Trilogy™ and pneumatic Swiss LithoClast™ in managing renal stones with mini-PCNL. Methodology This descriptive retrospective study was conducted at the Department of Urology, Lady Reading Hospital, from January 1, 2023, to December 31, 2023. A record of male and female patients aged more than 18 years who underwent mini-PCNL for renal stones was retrieved. The following two groups of patients were created: group A (n = 25) mini-PCNL with Swiss LithoClast Trilogy™ and group B (n = 26) mini-PCNL with pneumatic Swiss LithoClast™. The efficacy and safety profile of both groups was compared. Results A total of 51 patients were enrolled, with 25 in group A and 26 in group B. Groups A and B had mean ages of 45.2 and 47.5 years, respectively. Male participants outnumbered females in both groups, 72% (n = 18) in group A and 77% (n = 20) in group B. Group A had a mean stone size of 15.8 mm, and group B had a mean stone size of 16.5 mm. Stone-free rate on postoperative day one was 88% (n = 22) in group A and 84.6% (n = 22) in group B, with no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). At the end of three months, 96% of participants in group A and 84.6% of patients in group B were found to be free of stones, and the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Intraoperative hemorrhage occurred in 12% (n = 3) of group A and 15.4% (n = 4) of group B patients, with no significant difference (p > 0.05). Conclusions There were no significant differences in stone-free rates, complication rates, or intraoperative/postoperative complications between mini-PCNL with Swiss LithoClast Trilogy™ or Pneumatic Swiss LithoClast™.

BACKGROUND: Ureterorenoscopy (URS) for ureteral or renal stones is traditionally performed under general anesthesia (GA). Sedation is an alternative to GA, allowing control of the level of consciousness, spontaneous ventilation, and faster recovery. Our aim was to compare sedation and GA for patients undergoing ureterorenoscopy. Endpoints were stone-free rate (SFR) and complication rates.
METHODS: Monocentric comparative retrospective study including all consecutive ureterorenoscopies for ureteral or renal stone. The inclusion period was dichotomized in two 6-months periods due to the COVID-19 pandemic: from January 1 to July 1, 2019 (URS under GA) and from January 1 to July 1, 2021 (URS under GA or sedation). Stone-free (SF) status was defined as the absence of stone or fragment>4mm after the first ureterorenoscopy. Complication rates were assessed according to the Satava (perioperative complications) and Clavien-Dindo (postoperative complications) classifications. Statistical analysis was performed by Chi-square test.
RESULTS: A total of 185 patients were included for a total of 206 ureterorenoscopies; 82 underwent ureterorenoscopy under GA and 103 under sedation. The median stone size was 10 [7-16] mm. In all, 150 (81%) patients had at least one intrarenal stone. The SFR was similar between the two groups (67% GA group, 69% sedation group, P=0.912). In the sedation group, the mean SFR in ureter was 83.7% vs. 92.5% in the GA group. In renal cavities, the mean SFR was 46.4% in the sedation group vs. 42.5% in the GA group. Satava grade I, IIa, and IIb complications were 5 (6%), 5 (6%), and 1 (1%) in the GA group and 6 (6%), 1 (1%), and 3 (3%) in the sedation group, respectively (P=0.214). The grade I, II, III, and IV Clavien complications were 6 (7%), 3 (4%), 0 (0%), and 2 (2%) in the GA group and 6 (6%), 4 (4%), 1 (1%), and 4 (4%) in the sedation group, respectively (P=0.928).
CONCLUSIONS: Our post COVID-19 study showed no difference in efficacy and safety between ureterorenoscopy under sedation and GA for patients with renal stones. Our results confirm the interest of the sedation procedure, particularly in the context of outpatient surgery.
METHODS:

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety of transurethral ureteroscopy (URS) for urolithiasis in bedridden patients and to identify bedridden patient-specific risk factors for postoperative complications.
METHODS: The patients who underwent URS for urolithiasis were divided into bedridden patients and good performance status (PS) patients, and the groups were compared regarding their clinical characteristics and postoperative complications. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate independent predictors of postoperative febrile urinary tract infection (fUTI).
RESULTS: A total of 1626 patients were included, 276 in the bedridden patient group, and 1350 in the good PS patient group. The bedridden patient group had a significantly higher age and higher proportion of females and had multiple comorbidities. In 77 patients (27.9%), 88 postoperative complications developed for the bedridden patient group. Clavien-Dindo grade III or IV complications were observed in only 8 patients. No grade V complications were observed. The most common complication was fUTI. The frequency of fUTI with grade III or IV for the bedridden patient group (2.2%) was higher compared with the good PS patient group (0.5%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.13). Bedridden patient-specific risk factors for fUTI included female sex, diabetes mellitus, cerebrovascular comorbidities, lower extremity contracture, and prolonged operative time.
CONCLUSIONS: URS for urolithiasis is a feasible and acceptable procedure in bedridden patients, despite the moderate rate of postoperative complications. The identified risk factors provide a framework for risk stratification and individualized care in this unique patient population.

BACKGROUND: Yucatan stands out as the state with the highest prevalence of urolithiasis in Mexico, placing significant demands on healthcare services, such as consultation and surgical intervention. Staghorn calculi are related to recurrent urinary tract infections, and their management is always surgical. The stone-free rate is a parameter used to measure the success of surgery, with residual stones considered those persisting four weeks after surgical management. There are understudied prognostic factors that can predict the success of achieving stone-free status, taking into account the number of stones, their location, and the anatomical variations of the patient\'s collecting system. The study aims to determine the prognostic factors for residual lithiasis in patients with staghorn calculi treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy at the High Specialty Regional Hospital of the Yucatan Peninsula.
METHODS: A case-control study was performed including 188 patients, aged 18 years or older, and diagnosed with staghorn calculus from January 2022 to June 2023, grouping the patients according to their stone-free rate evidence on postoperative computed tomography. Data were collected from the records of the Urology Department at a high-specialty hospital in Yucatan. The groups were analyzed, aiming to establish an association between preoperative factors and postoperative outcomes measured in terms of stone-free rate.
RESULTS: A total of 188 patients with staghorn calculi were included, with a predominance in females (58.5%) and a mean age of 45.4 ± 11.9 years. The most common comorbidity was hypertension (29.8%), and 27.7% had a history of recurrent urinary tract infections. Regarding the Sampaio classification, B1 was the most prevalent in our population with 66 cases (35.1%), while Type A2 was the least common (13.8%). According to what was obtained through the multivariate logistic regression model, the calyceal anatomy Type A1 and A2 were associated with residual lithiasis (p= 0.016 OR: 2.994 CI: 1.223-7.331), and Grade IV was associated with a higher rate of residual lithiasis (p=0.005 CI: 1.586-13.100). A statistically significant association was found between stone burden and the presence of residual lithiasis (p=< 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Guy\'s Score Grade IV showed a higher incidence of residual lithiasis, seemingly associated with stone burden, leading to the conclusion that both factors were categorized as predictors for the development of post-surgical residual lithiasis. Regarding anatomical variations according to Sampaio, it was observed that types A1 and A2 showed a lower rate of stone-free status. Therefore, we also consider them as variables that may influence the achievement of success in endourological management. Personalized patient assessment allows for more accurate prognostic factors, enabling a more comprehensive surgical planning in the presence of staghorn calculi.

Background: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the preferred treatment for the removal of large kidney stones, sized >20 mm. However, there is still an ongoing debate concerning the best anesthesia for PCNL. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between general and spinal anesthesia for PCNL. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis study. A systematic, electronic literature search was performed in several databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar until July 1 st, 2022. The quality of the articles was examined using Crombie\'s Items (for non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs)) and Jadad Scale (for RCTs). The outcomes assessed were operation time, fluoroscopy time, length of stay, stone-free rate, overall complication rate, specific postoperative complications, cost, pain score, and postoperative analgesic requirement. The article selection was reported based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. We assessed four RCTs and eight retrospective studies. Meta-analysis of selected studies was performed using the Review Manager 5.3. Results: General anesthesia resulted in fewer Clavien-Dindo grade II (OR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49 - 0.94; p=0.02), major complications (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45 - 0.94; p=0.02, and lower transfusion rates (OR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.53 - 0.94; p=0.02). Whereas spinal anesthesia resulted in faster operation time (Mean Difference: -12.98; 95% CI: -20.56 - -5.41; p<0.001, fluoroscopy time (MD: -26.15; 95% CI: -42.79 - -9.50; p=0.002), reduced length of stay (MD: -0.47; 95% CI: -0.75 - 0.20; p<0.001), and lower postoperative analgesic requirement and cost. No significant difference in stone-free rate (OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.92 - 1.26; p=0.37). PCNL performed using either general anesthesia or spinal anesthesia is equally safe and effective. Conclusions: Each method of anesthesia has its own advantages and disadvantages. The final choice between general and spinal anesthesia should be based on the patient\'s condition and surgical team preference.