1
|
Gauhar V, Traxer O, Yuen SKK, Castellani D, Zeng G, Fong KY, Wei Z, Ragoori DR, Elshazly M, Petkova K, Kamal W, Gadzhiev N, Gokce MI, Lakmichi MA, Lee C, El Hajj A, Zawadzki M, Rico L, Contreras P, Tefik T, Chai CA, Geavlete P, Sarica K, Kwok JL, Somani BK, Lim EJ. Does intraoperative surgeon reported stone free status (IO-SFS) correlate with CT based post operative stone free status (PO-SFS) in flexible ureteroscopy using flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) in real-world practice? A prospective global FANS collaborative study group initiative with the section of EAU endourology. World J Urol 2025; 43:184. [PMID: 40119185 DOI: 10.1007/s00345-025-05570-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2025] [Accepted: 03/10/2025] [Indexed: 03/24/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) has been proven to improve stone-free rate (SFR) and many studies report high intraoperative 100% stone-free status (IO-SFS) and postoperative 100% stone-free status (PO-SFS). The reliability of IO-SFS vis-à-vis image-proven PO-SFS needs to be evaluated as it has implications on perioperative management. METHODS Our prospective, multicenter study enrolled 704 adult patients from 21 centers who underwent FURS with FANS between August 2023 and October 2024. IO-SFS was categorized into three groups: (1) 100% SFR (no dust or fragments), (2) only dust remaining, and (3) both dust and fragments remaining. PO-SFS was assessed via 2 mm non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) at 30 days and categorized into four grades: Grade A (100% stone-free), Grade B (single ≤ 2 mm residual fragment), Grade C (single 2.1-4 mm), and Grade D (multiple or any > 4 mm). Primary outcome was correlation between intraoperative and postoperative 100% SFS. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications, reintervention rates, and predictors of residual fragments and perioperative complications. RESULTS IO-SFS reported 100% SFR in 395 cases. Postoperative NCCT confirmed a significantly higher SFS (Grade A + B) in this group (99%) compared to 95.8% in the dust only group and 61.1% in the dust and fragments group (p < 0.001). Positive predictive value (PPV) of intraoperative 100% SFR was 99% with post-op NCCT, while negative predictive value (NPV) was only 12.3%. Secondary outcome analysis showed higher stone volumes, lower pole locations, and use of high-power holmium lasers were associated with increased 2-4 mm residual fragments (OR 6.53, p = 0.047). In the 100% SFR group, the use of 12/14 Fr UAS and disposable scopes was significantly higher, with a preferred strategy combining fragmentation, dusting, and aspiration. No cases of sepsis or significant postoperative bleeding were reported due to the use of FANS, with fewer patients requiring post-operative stenting. CONCLUSION This study provides robust evidence that surgeon-reported 100% IO-SFS is highly predictive of NCCT-proven postoperative stone-free outcomes, with a PPV of 99%. However, intraoperative detection of residual fragments is less reliable in predicting persistent stone burden, as only 40% of these patients eventually achieved SFS on NCCT. Standardized imaging protocols remain necessary to optimize postoperative management and patient counseling, while avoid unnecessary re-intervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vineet Gauhar
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | - Steffi Kar Kei Yuen
- SH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Urology Division, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti di Ancona, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Guohua Zeng
- Department of Urology and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
| | - Khi Yung Fong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 11 Hospital Dr, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
| | - Zhu Wei
- Department of Urology and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
| | - Deepak Reddy Ragoori
- Asian Institute of Nephrology and Urology, Urology, 6-3-562/A, Errum Manzil, Hyperabad, 500082, Telangana, India
| | - Mohamed Elshazly
- Faculty of Medicine Urology Department, Menoufia university, Shibin el Kom, Egypt
| | - Kremena Petkova
- Department of Urology and Nephrology, Military Medical Academy, 3, Georgi Sofiiski blvd., Sofia, 1606, Bulgaria
| | - Wissam Kamal
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Ministry of the National Guard-Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Nariman Gadzhiev
- Department of Urology, Saint-Petersburg State University Hospital, Saint-Petersburg, Russia
| | - Mehmet Ilker Gokce
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Mohamed Amine Lakmichi
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Mohammed the VIth of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco
| | - Chaeeun Lee
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 11 Hospital Dr, Singapore, 169610, Singapore
| | - Albert El Hajj
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| | | | - Luis Rico
- Department of Urology, Hospital Aleman, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Pablo Contreras
- Department of Urology, Hospital Aleman, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Tzevat Tefik
- Department of Urology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Chu Ann Chai
- Urology Unit, Department of Surgery, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | | | - Kemal Sarica
- Department of Urology, Medical School, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Jia-Lun Kwok
- Department of Urology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, 11 Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore, 308433, Singapore
| | | | - Ee Jean Lim
- Department of Urology, Singapore General Hospital, Academia Level 5, 20 College Rd, Singapore, 169856, Singapore.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gauhar V, Traxer O, Kandarthanda NM, Somani BK, Castellani D, Sabnis RB, Ragoori D. Introducing a new device for direct in-scope suction technique during flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stone disease: an EAU Section of Endourology prospective multicenter audit using the GLITZ system. Ther Adv Urol 2025; 17:17562872251320807. [PMID: 39991268 PMCID: PMC11843708 DOI: 10.1177/17562872251320807] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2024] [Accepted: 01/28/2025] [Indexed: 02/25/2025] Open
Abstract
Background The direct in-scope suction (DISS) involves a two-way adaptor mounted on a scope to aspirate and irrigate the pelvicalyceal system during flexible ureteroscopy. While integrated suction single-use scopes manage small dust particles effectively, they cannot remove particles >250 µm and are limited by single use. Objectives To evaluate perioperative outcomes of the GLITZ system, a lightweight suction accessory for flexible ureteroscopes, facilitating laser lithotripsy with integrated aspiration. Design Prospective, multicenter study. Methods The GLITZ system, a 100 g trigger mounted on the ureteroscope handle, integrates with an irrigation and aspiration apparatus featuring a flow-regulating sensor. A finger-trigger activates suction, stopping irrigation until released, enhancing visibility and safety by automatically stopping irrigation if blockages occur. The study involved 29 patients (November 2023-April 2024). Procedures were performed using a disposable 7.5 Fr ureteroscope, ureteral access sheath, and thulium fiber or 100 W holmium:YAG laser. Surgeons evaluated ease of use and performance. Stone-free status was evaluated at a 30-day CT scan and classified as follows: Grade A: zero RF; Grade B: single RF not up 2 mm; Grade C: single RF 2.1-4 mm; and Grade D: single/multiple RFs > 4 mm. Data are reported as median and (interquartile range). Results A total of 31.1% of patients were female. The median age was 54 years. Pain was the most common complaint, and 41.8% had multiple stones. GLITZ system showed satisfactory performance in 93.1% of cases, with complete dust aspiration achieved in 62.1%. Device dislodgement occurred in 24.1% of cases. Median operative time was 40 min, achieving postoperative CT at 30 days confirmed Grade A stone-free status in 75.9%. Fever was the most common complication (10.3%), with no sepsis case. Conclusion The GLITZ system in DISS shows effectiveness with a 96.6% stone-free rate (Grade A + B) at 30 days, indicating strong potential for flexible ureteroscopy, though additional studies are needed to optimize flow rates and usability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vineet Gauhar
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Department of Urology AP-HP, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France
| | | | - Bhaskar K. Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Via Conca 71, Ancona 60126, Italy
| | - Ravindra B Sabnis
- Department of Urology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, India
| | - Deepak Ragoori
- Department of Urology, Asian Institute of Nephrology & Urology, Irram Manzil Colony, Hyderabad, India
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gauhar V, Traxer O, Castellani D, Sietz C, Chew BH, Fong KY, Hamri SB, Gökce MI, Gadzhiev N, Galosi AB, Yuen SKK, El Hajj A, Ko R, Zawadzki M, Sridharan V, Lakmichi MA, Corrales M, Malkhasyan V, Ragoori D, Soebhali B, Tan K, Chai CA, Tursunkulov AN, Tanidir Y, Persaud S, Elshazly M, Kamal W, Tefik T, Shrestha A, Tiong HC, Somani BK. Could Use of a Flexible and Navigable Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Be a Potential Game-changer in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery? Outcomes at 30 Days from a Large, Prospective, Multicenter, Real-world Study by the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Section. Eur Urol Focus 2024; 10:975-982. [PMID: 38789313 DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2024.05.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2024] [Revised: 05/03/2024] [Accepted: 05/15/2024] [Indexed: 05/26/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the stone-free status (SFS) rate and complications after flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) for treatment of renal stones using a flexible and navigable suction (FANS) ureteral access sheath. METHODS Data for adults undergoing fURS in 25 centers worldwide were prospectively collected (August 2023 to January 2024). Exclusion criteria were abnormal renal anatomy and ureteral stones. All patients had computed tomography scans before and within 30 d after fURS with a FANS ureteral access sheath. SFS was defined as follows: grade A, zero fragments; grade B, a single fragment ≤2 mm; grade C, a single fragment 2.1-4 mm; and grade D, single/multiple fragments >4 mm. Data for continuous variables are presented as the median and interquartile range (IQR). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to evaluate predictors of grade A SFS. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS The study enrolled 394 patients (59.1% male) with a median age of 49 yr (IQR 36-61). The median stone volume was 1260 mm3 (IQR 706-1800). Thulium fiber laser (TFL) was used in 45.9% of cases and holmium laser in the rest. The median lasing time was 18 min (IQR 11-28) and the median operative time was 49 min (IQR 37-70). One patient required a blood transfusion and 3.3% of patients had low-grade fever. No patient developed sepsis. Low-grade ureteral injury occurred in eight patients (2%). The grade A SFS rate was 57.4% and the grade A + B SFS rate was 97.2%, while 2.8% of patients had grade C or D SFS. Eleven patients underwent repeat fURS. Multivariable analysis revealed that a stone volume of 1501-3000 mm3 (odds ratio 0.50) and of >3000 mm3 (odds ratio 0.29) were significantly associated with lower probability of grade A SFS, while TFL use was associated with higher SFS probability (odds ratio 1.83). Limitations include the lack of a comparative group. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS fURS using a FANS ureteral access sheath resulted in a high SFS rate with negligible serious adverse event and reintervention rates. PATIENT SUMMARY We looked at 30-day results for patients undergoing telescopic laser treatment for kidney stones using a special type of vacuum-assisted sheath to remove stone fragments. We found a high stone-free rate with minimal complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vineet Gauhar
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.
| | - Christian Sietz
- Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Ben Hall Chew
- Department of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Khi Yung Fong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Saeed Bin Hamri
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mehmet Ilker Gökce
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Nariman Gadzhiev
- Department of Urology, St. Petersburg State University Hospital, St. Petersburg, Russia
| | - Andrea Benedetto Galosi
- Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Steffi Kar Kei Yuen
- SH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Albert El Hajj
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Raymond Ko
- Nepean Urology Research Group, Kingswood, Australia
| | | | | | - Mohamed Amine Lakmichi
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Mohammed the VIth of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco
| | - Mariela Corrales
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | - Vigen Malkhasyan
- Endourological Department, A.I. Yevdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Moscow, Russia
| | - Deepak Ragoori
- Department of Urology, Asian Institute of Nephrology & Urology, Hyderabad, India
| | - Boyke Soebhali
- Department of Urology, Abdul Wahab Sjahranie Hospital Medical Faculty, Muliawarman University, Samarinda, Indonesia
| | - Karl Tan
- Department of Surgery, Section of Urology, Veterans Memorial Medical Center, Quezon City, Philippines
| | - Chu Ann Chai
- Department of Surgery, Urology Unit, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | | | - Yiloren Tanidir
- Department of Urology, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Satyendra Persaud
- Division of Clinical Surgical Sciences, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago
| | | | - Wissam Kamal
- Urology Unit, King Fahd General Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Tzevat Tefik
- Department of Urology, Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Anil Shrestha
- Department of Urology, National Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal
| | - Heng Chin Tiong
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Bhaskar Kumar Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kwok JL, Somani B, Sarica K, Yuen SKK, Zawadzki M, Castellani D, Persaud S, Chai CA, Kamal W, Tefik T, Tursunkulov AN, Soebhali B, Hajj AE, Ko R, Fong KY, Dragos L, Tanidir Y, Angerri O, Traxer O, Gauhar V. Multicenter outcome analysis of different sheath sizes for Flexible and Navigable Suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) ureteroscopy: an EAU Endourology collaboration with the global FANS study group. Urolithiasis 2024; 52:162. [PMID: 39545972 DOI: 10.1007/s00240-024-01662-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2024] [Accepted: 11/06/2024] [Indexed: 11/17/2024]
Abstract
Flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) is a potential game changer in flexible ureteroscopy (FURS). The influence of sheath size on outcomes needs research. The primary aim was to analyze 30-day single stage stone free status (SFS), zero fragment rate (ZFR) and complications when using 10/12Fr sheaths vis a vis other sheath sizes. The global FANS research group published the 30-day outcomes in patients who underwent FANS and reasoned this can be a potential game changer. We included 295 patients from this anonymized dataset with division into two groups: Group 1 (Smaller sheath) - 10/12Fr FANS, and Group 2 (Larger sheath) - 11/13Fr or 12/14Fr sheaths. Stone volume was similar between both groups (median 1320 mm3, p = 0.88). Ureteroscopy and total operative time was longer in the smaller sheath group (35 vs. 32 min, p = 0.02 and 50 vs. 45 min, p = 0.001, respectively). While 30-day computed tomography SFS (100% stone free or single residual fragment ≤ 2 mm) were not significantly different (96% vs. 95%, p > 0.99), ZFR (100% stone-free) was better with smaller sheaths (68% vs. 53%, p = 0.02). There was no difference in postoperative complication rates, and no sepsis in both groups. Urologists should consider individualizing appropriate sheath size in normal adult kidneys. Sheath size did not affect complication rates, risk of perioperative injury to the pelvicalyceal system or ureteric injury, but smaller FANS sheaths had similar high SFS. The ZFR with smaller sheaths was better, but this needs to be validated. These smaller sheath outcomes need to be balanced with longer ureteroscopy time, operative time, reach to the lower pole, ease of suction and visibility during lithotripsy. Large volume studies in different types of pelvicalyceal anatomy can determine if indeed smaller FANS is the best choice in FURS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jia-Lun Kwok
- Department of Urology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, 11 Jalan Tan Tock Seng, Singapore, 308433, Singapore.
- Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France.
| | - Bhaskar Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Kemal Sarica
- Department of Urology, Prof. Dr. Ilhan Varank Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey
- Department of Urology, Medical School, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Steffi Kar Kei Yuen
- SH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | | | - Daniele Castellani
- Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Delle Marche, Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Satyendra Persaud
- Division of Clinical Surgical Sciences, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago
| | - Chu Ann Chai
- Department of Surgery, Urology Unit, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - Wissam Kamal
- Urology Unit, King Fahd General Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Tzevat Tefik
- Department of Urology, Istanbul University, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | | | - Boyke Soebhali
- Department of Urology, Abdul Wahab Sjahranie Hospital Medical Faculty, Muliawarman University, Samarinda, Indonesia
| | - Albert El Hajj
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
| | - Raymond Ko
- Department of Urology, Nepean Hospital, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Khi Yung Fong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Laurian Dragos
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Yiloren Tanidir
- Department of Urology, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Oriol Angerri
- Department of Urology, Fundació Puigvert University Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France
- Sorbonne University, GRC n°20 LITHIASE RENALE, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, F-75020, PARIS, France
| | - Vineet Gauhar
- Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gauhar V, Traxer O, Sabnis RB, Fong KY, Gharia P, Grover R, Ragoori D, Lim EJ, Tanidir Y, Mehta A, Gökce MI, Lakmichi MA, Soebhali B, Gadzhiev N, Chew BH, Somani BK, Castellani D. The reused-disposable scope in flexible ureteroscopy for stones as a cost-conscious approach: Reporting the outcomes of a real-world practice multicenter study of 2183 patients by the team of worldwide endourological researchers group. Indian J Urol 2024; 40:235-241. [PMID: 39555430 PMCID: PMC11567569 DOI: 10.4103/iju.iju_38_24] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2024] [Revised: 06/10/2024] [Accepted: 07/18/2024] [Indexed: 11/19/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction We aimed to assess complications and stone-free rate of flexible ureteroscopy (FU) reusing disposable scopes (RDS) after repeated sterilization. Methods Data from adults from 11 centers were retrospectively reviewed (January 2020-December 2022). Inclusion criteria were proximal ureteral/renal stone(s). All cases were performed using an RDS to save costs for patients who come from economically challenged environments. Residual fragments (RFs) were defined as single fragment ≥4 mm or multiple fragments of any size within 3 months. Continuous variables are presented as median and interquartile range. Results Two thousand one hundred and eighty-three patients were included, of whom 67.0% were male. Median age was 48.0 (36-59) years. The median stone diameter was 10.2 (9-14) mm. Flash sterilization was used in 90.2% (plasma in 60.5%). Approximately, 88% had FU with an RDS used ≤2 times (12%: 3-5 times). RDS needed to be changed intraoperatively in 3.9% of cases due to its malfunction. Commonly, defects in RDS function were reported in upward (1.6%) and downward deflection (6.5%) and image quality on white balancing (4.7%). Fever >38C was seen in 13.7% of cases, and sepsis in 0.5%. RFs were found in 31.4% of cases. Lower pole (odds ratio [OR] 5.63) or pelvis stone (OR 4.67), faulty scopes (OR 12.8), and total operation time (OR 1.05) were factors associated with higher odds of RFs. Stone size (OR 1.09), positive urine culture (OR 1.67), interpolar stone (OR 1.68), and prestenting (OR 1.37) were factors associated with higher odds of fever/sepsis. Conclusions RDS was used as a cost-conscious approach with a low rate of serious infections but with a high rate of RFs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vineet Gauhar
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Department of Urology AP HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Ravindra B Sabnis
- Department of Urology, Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
| | - Khi Yung Fong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | | | - Rishi Grover
- Department of Urology, Icon Hospital, Surat, Gujarat, India
| | - Deepak Ragoori
- Department of Urology, Asian Institute of Nephrology and Urology, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
| | - Ee Jean Lim
- Department of Urology, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Yiloren Tanidir
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Amish Mehta
- Department of Urology, B T Savani Kidney Hospital, Rajkot, Gujarat, India
| | - Mehmet Ilker Gökce
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Mohamed Amine Lakmichi
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Mohammed the VI of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco
| | - Boyke Soebhali
- Department of Urology, Abdul Wahab Sjahranie Hospital, Medical Faculty Mulawarman University, Samarinda, Indonesia
| | - Nariman Gadzhiev
- Department of Urology, Saint Petersburg State University Hospital, Saint Petersburg, Russia
| | - Ben H. Chew
- Department of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Bhaskar Kumar Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Department of Clinical Science, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Le Marche, Ancona, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gauhar V, Traxer O, Castellani D, Fong KY, Bin Hamri S, Gökce MI, Gadzhiev N, Corrales M, Malkhasyan V, Ragoori D, Soebhali B, Tan K, Chai CA, Tursunkulov AN, Tanidir Y, Persaud S, Elshazly M, Kamal W, Tefik T, Shrestha A, Chew BH, Lakmichi MA, Galosi AB, Tiong HC, Seitz C, Somani BK. Operative outcomes 24 hours after retrograde intrarenal surgery for solitary renal calculi using a flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath. A prospective global multicenter study by the European Association of Urology Section on Urolithiasis. Minerva Urol Nephrol 2024; 76:625-634. [PMID: 39320253 DOI: 10.23736/s2724-6051.24.05961-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/26/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Suction techniques showed potential to improve outcomes of retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS). We assessed the 24-hour stone-free rate (SFR) and complications after RIRS using flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS-UAS). METHODS Sixteen centers prospectively contributed to data (August 2023-October 2023). Inclusion criteria: age ≥18 years, single renal stone, pre and 24-hour post-RIRS CT scan. Exclusion criteria were: ureteral stone, anomalous kidney, multiple stones. SFR was divided into: 1) grade A - no fragments; 2) grade B - fragments ≤2 mm; 3) grade C - fragments 2.1-4 mm; and 4) grade D - fragments >4 mm. A multivariable logistic regression analysis model was performed to assess factors associated with the odds of having grade A stone-free status. Data are expressed as median (interquartile range), absolute numbers and frequencies, odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS One hundred forty-two patients with a median age of 52 years (40-61) were enrolled. 61.3% were males. Median stone volume was 1165 mm3 (656-1936). Median operative time was 48.5 (36.25-71.75) min. Transient fever (37°C-37.5°C) occurred in 10 (7%) patients. No sepsis case occurred. 96.5% of patients were stone-free (Grade A+B). Grade A SFR was 52.8%. All patients were discharged within 48 hours. Bone window (OR 3.156 95% CI 1.177-9.130, P=0.027) was the only factor significantly associated with higher odds of 100% SFR, while stone volume (OR 0.999, 95% CI 0.999-1.000, P=0.007) was significantly associated with lower odds. CONCLUSIONS Imaging and clinical evidence demonstrate excellent perioperative outcomes just 24 hours post RIRS with FANS-UAS. The technique demonstrates a good safety profile, ability for immediate high SFR, and a low rate of infective complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vineet Gauhar
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Department of Urology, Tenon Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Unit of Urology, Marche Polytechnic University, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria (AOU) delle Marche, Ancona, Italy -
| | - Khi Y Fong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Saeed Bin Hamri
- Department of Urology, Specialized Medical Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mehmet I Gökce
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye
| | - Nariman Gadzhiev
- Department of Urology, Saint-Petersburg State University Hospital, Saint-Petersburg, Russia
| | - Mariela Corrales
- Department of Urology, Tenon Hospital, Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Sorbonne University, Paris, France
| | - Vigen Malkhasyan
- Department of Urology, A.I. Evdokimov Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry, Moscow, Russia
| | - Deepak Ragoori
- Department of Urology, Asian Institute of NephroUrology, Hyderabad, India
| | - Boyke Soebhali
- Department of Urology, Abdul Wahab Sjahranie Hospital Medical Faculty, Muliawarman University, Samarinda, Indonesia
| | - Karl Tan
- Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, Veterans Memorial Medical Center, Quezon, Philippines
| | - Chu A Chai
- Unit of Urology, Department of Surgery, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | | | - Yiloren Tanidir
- Unit of Urology, Marmara University Pendik Research and Education Hospital, Istanbul, Türkiye
| | - Satyendra Persaud
- Division of Clinical Surgical Sciences, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago
| | | | - Wissam Kamal
- Unit of Urology, King Fahd General Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Tzevat Tefik
- Department of Urology, Istanbul University, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Türkiye
| | - Anil Shrestha
- Department of Urology, National Academy of Medical Sciences, Bir Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal
| | - Ben H Chew
- Department of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mohamed A Lakmichi
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Mohammed the VIth of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco
| | - Andrea B Galosi
- Unit of Urology, Marche Polytechnic University, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria (AOU) delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Heng C Tiong
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Christian Seitz
- Department of Urology Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Bhaskar K Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Panthier F, Gauhar V, Ventimiglia E, Kwok JL, Keller EX, Traxer O. Rethinking Stone-free Rates and Surgical Outcomes in Endourology: A Point of View from PEARLS Members. Eur Urol 2024; 86:198-199. [PMID: 38890068 DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.06.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2024] [Revised: 05/22/2024] [Accepted: 06/02/2024] [Indexed: 06/20/2024]
Abstract
There is a lack of consensus on definitions for the success of endourological stone treatments. The zero-fragment rate (residual fragments [RFs] <1 mm) is now considered more accurate than the stone-free rate (RFs ≤4 mm). As stone volume may be adopted as the recommended method for preoperative estimation of the stone burden, the volumetric stone-free rate may be superior to standard linear RF measurements in defining success.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Frédéric Panthier
- Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis no. 20, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France; Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France; PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, Paris, France; Department of Urology, Westmoreland Street Hospital, UCLH NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
| | - Vineet Gauhar
- Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France; Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore
| | - Eugenio Ventimiglia
- Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France; Young Academic Urologists Endourology and Urolithiasis Working Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands; Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Jia-Lun Kwok
- Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France; Department of Urology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore
| | - Etienne Xavier Keller
- Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France; Young Academic Urologists Endourology and Urolithiasis Working Group, Arnhem, The Netherlands; Department of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis no. 20, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France; Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS), Paris, France; PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Chai CA, Inoue T, Somani BK, Yuen SKK, Ragoori D, Gadzhiev N, Tanidir Y, Emiliani E, Hamri SB, Lakmichi MA, Chandramohan V, Naselli A, Soebhali B, Gokce MI, Tursunkulov AN, de Fata Chillón FR, Chew BH, Traxer O, Castellani D, Gauhar V. Comparing thulium fiber versus high power holmium laser in bilateral same sitting retrograde intrarenal surgery for kidney stones: Results from a multicenter study. Investig Clin Urol 2024; 65:451-458. [PMID: 39249917 PMCID: PMC11390269 DOI: 10.4111/icu.20240185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/03/2024] [Revised: 07/18/2024] [Accepted: 08/05/2024] [Indexed: 09/10/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Traditionally, bilateral urolithiasis treatment involved staged interventions due to safety concerns. Recent studies have shown that same-sitting bilateral retrograde intrarenal surgery (SSB-RIRS) is effective, with acceptable complication rates. However, there's no clear data on the optimum laser for the procedure. This study aimed to assess outcomes of SSB-RIRS comparing thulium fiber laser (TFL) and high-power holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser in a multicenter real-world practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS Retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing SSB-RIRS from January 2015 to June 2022 across 21 centers worldwide. Three months perioperative and postoperative outcomes were recorded, focusing on complications and stone-free rates (SFR). RESULTS A total of 733 patients were included, with 415 in group 1 (Ho:YAG) and 318 in group 2 (TFL). Both groups have similar demographic and stone characteristics. Group 1 had more incidence of symptomatic pain or hematuria (26.5% vs. 10.4%). Operation and lasing times were comparable. The use of baskets was higher in group 1 (47.2% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001). Postoperative complications and length of hospital stay were similar. Group 2 had a higher overall SFR. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that age, presence of stone at the lower pole, and stone diameter were associated with lower odds of being stone-free bilaterally, while TFL was associated with higher odds. CONCLUSIONS Our study shows that urologists use both lasers equally for SSB-RIRS. Reintervention rates are low, safety profiles are comparable, and single-stage bilateral SFR may be better in certain cases. Bilateral lower pole and large-volume stones have higher chances of residual fragments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chu Ann Chai
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
| | - Takaaki Inoue
- Department of Urology, Hara Genitourinary Private Hospital, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan
| | - Bhaskar Kumar Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Steffi Kar Kei Yuen
- SH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Deepak Ragoori
- Department of Urology, Asian Institute of Nephrology & Urology, Irram Manzil Colony, Hyderabad, India
| | - Nariman Gadzhiev
- Department of Urology, Saint-Petersburg State University Hospital, Saint-Petersburg, Russia
| | - Yiloren Tanidir
- Department of Urology, School of Medicine, Marmara University, İstanbul, Türkiye
| | - Esteban Emiliani
- Department of Urology, Fundacion Puigvert, Autónomos University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Saeed Bin Hamri
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Ministry of the National Guard Health Affairs, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
| | - Mohamed Amine Lakmichi
- Department of Urology, University Hospital Mohammed the VIth of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco
| | - Vaddi Chandramohan
- Department of Urology, Preeti Urology and Kidney Hospital, Hyderabad, India
| | | | - Boyke Soebhali
- Department of Urology, Abdul Wahab Sjahranie Hospital Medical Faculty, Muliawarman University, Samarinda, Indonesia
| | - Mehmet Ilker Gokce
- Department of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye
| | | | | | - Ben Hall Chew
- Department of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Department of Urology, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France
| | - Vineet Gauhar
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ong WLK, Somani BK, Fong KY, Teoh JYC, Sarica K, Chai CA, Ragoori D, Tailly T, Hamri SB, Heng CT, Biligere S, Emiliani E, Gadzhiev N, Tanidir Y, Chew BH, Castellani D, Traxer O, Gauhar V. Retrograde intrarenal surgery for asymptomatic incidental renal stones: a retrospective, real-world data analysis. BJU Int 2024; 134:201-206. [PMID: 38343138 DOI: 10.1111/bju.16292] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/19/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine surgical outcomes and stone-free rates (SFRs) when offering upfront retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) to patients with asymptomatic incidental renal stones (AIRS), as active surveillance, shockwave lithotripsy or upfront intervention in patients with AIRS is still a debate among urologists. PATIENTS AND METHODS This retrospective FLEXible Ureteroscopy Outcomes Registry (FLEXOR), supported by the Team of Worldwide Endourological Researchers (TOWER), examines adult patients who underwent RIRS. We analysed a subset of asymptomatic patients with renal stones on imaging who were treated with RIRS. Data includes patient characteristics, stone specifications, anaesthesia type, perioperative details, complications, and SFR. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess factors associated with the SFR. RESULTS Among 679 patients with AIRS, 640 met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 55 years, with 33.4% being female. In all, 22.1% had positive urine cultures. The median stone diameter was 12 mm, commonly in lower and interpolar locations. RIRS was preferentially performed under general anaesthesia using a reusable scope in 443 cases. Prophylactic antibiotics were administered to 314 patients. The median operation time was 58 min and the median laser time was 24 min. The SFR was 68.8%. The use of holmium laser (odds ratio [OR] 0.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.63; P < 0.01) and multiple stones (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.76; P < 0.01) were factors associated with lower odds of being stone free. Overall complications were minimal, with sepsis in 1.6% of patients. Re-interventions were performed in 76 cases (11.8%), with RIRS being the most common in 67 cases (10.6%). CONCLUSION Our multicentre real-world study is the first of its kind that highlights the pros and cons of offering RIRS to patients with AIRS and demonstrates a favourable SFR with acceptable complications. Pre-emptively discussing potential re-intervention helps patients make informed decisions, particularly in cases involving large and multiple stones.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Bhaskar Kumar Somani
- Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Khi Yung Fong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
- S. H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China
| | - Kemal Sarica
- Department of Urology, Biruni University Medical School, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Chu Ann Chai
- Urology Unit, Department of Surgery, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - Deepak Ragoori
- Department of Urology, Asian Institute of Nephrology & Urology, Irram Manzil Colony, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
| | - Thomas Tailly
- Department of Urology, ERN eUROGEN Accredited Centre, University Hospital of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Saeed Bin Hamri
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Ministry of the National Guard Health Affairs, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Chin Tiong Heng
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Sarvajit Biligere
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Esteban Emiliani
- Urology Department, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Fundación Puigvert Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Yiloren Tanidir
- Department of Urology, Marmara University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Ben Hall Chew
- Department of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Ospedali Riuniti Di Ancona, Università Politecnica Delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
| | - Oliver Traxer
- Department of Urology AP-HP, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Vineet Gauhar
- Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Chehroudi C, De S. Editorial Comment on "Determining the Stone Free Rate of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery. Which Radiological Technique? RIRSearch Study Group". Urology 2024; 187:22-23. [PMID: 38556375 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.09.072] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/02/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Cyrus Chehroudi
- Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Smita De
- Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Chai CA, Somani B, Castellani D, Fong KY, Sarica K, Emiliani E, Ong WLK, Ragoori D, Gökce MI, Gadzhiev N, Tanidir Y, Lakmichi MA, Inoue T, Pirola GM, Teoh JYC, Hamri SB, Tursunkulov AN, Ganpule A, Chew BH, Traxer O, Gauhar V. Comparing Same-Sitting Bilateral vs Unilateral Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in the Elderly. Urology 2024; 186:117-122. [PMID: 38417468 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2024.02.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2023] [Revised: 02/14/2024] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 03/01/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare same-sitting bilateral vs unilateral retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in elderly patients, focusing on postoperative complications and stone-free rates (SFR). METHODS Data from 2 multicenter databases, FLEXible ureteroscopy Outcomes Registry (FLEXOR) (unilateral RIRS) and same sitting bilateral-retrograde intrarenal surgery (SSB-RIRS) (bilateral RIRS), were analyzed, considering only patients aged 70+ with preoperative computed tomography. Patients were categorized into Group 1 (bilateral RIRS) and Group 2 (unilateral RIRS). Follow-up included imaging assessments and secondary treatments as needed. RESULTS Group 1 included 146 patients, while group 2 had 495. Group 1's patients were slightly older and had a higher prevalence of recurrent stone formation. Group 2 often underwent RIRS for incidental stones. Group 1 had larger and more pelvic stones. Laser lithotripsy and total operation times were significantly longer in Group 1. Group 2 had significantly higher overall stone-free rates, although there were no significant differences in ancillary procedures for residual fragments. Group 1 experienced more pelvicalyceal injuries needing stenting, postoperative fever, and post-op hematuria not requiring transfusion. CONCLUSION In conclusion, bilateral RIRS can be carefully considered in elderly patients. Preoperative counseling is essential for both primary and repeat RIRS procedures, and further research is needed to optimize instrument and laser strategies for better outcomes in elderly RIRS patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chu Ann Chai
- University Malaya, Department of Surgery Urology Unit, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
| | - Bhaskar Somani
- University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Urology, Southampton, United Kingdom
| | - Daniele Castellani
- Azienda ospedaliero universitaria Ospedali riuniti di Ancona Universita Politecnica delle Marche, Department of Urology, Ancona, Italy
| | - Khi Yung Fong
- Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine National University of Singapore, Faculty of Medicine, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Kemal Sarica
- Biruni University Medical School, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Estaban Emiliani
- Fundacion Puigvert Autónomos University of Barcelona, Department of Urology, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Deepak Ragoori
- Asian Institute Of Nephrology and Urology, Department of Urology, Hyderabad, India
| | - Mehmet Ilker Gökce
- Ankara University School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Nariman Gadzhiev
- Saint Petersburg State University Hospital Russia, Department of Urology, St Petersburg, Russia
| | - Yiloren Tanidir
- Marmara University School of Medicine, Department of Urology, Istanbul, Turkey
| | - Mohamed Amine Lakmichi
- University Hospital Mohammed the VIth of Marrakesh, Department of Urology, Marrakesh, Morocco
| | - Takaaki Inoue
- Hara Genitourinary Private Hospital and Kobe University, Department of Urology, Kobe, Japan
| | | | | | - Saeed Bin Hamri
- King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Department of Surgery, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | | | - Arvind Ganpule
- Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Department of Urology, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
| | - Ben Hall Chew
- University of British Columbia, Department of Urology, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Olivier Traxer
- Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis Tenon Hospital, Department of Urology, Paris, France
| | - Vineet Gauhar
- Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Department of Urology, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Chehroudi C, De S. Editorial Comment. Urology 2024:S0090-4295(24)00089-X. [PMID: 38387513 DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2024.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2023] [Accepted: 02/14/2024] [Indexed: 02/24/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Cyrus Chehroudi
- Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Smita De
- Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
| |
Collapse
|