Impacto del uso de la vaina de acceso ureteral durante la ureteroscopia flexible: estudio comparativo de eficacia y seguridad / Impact of ureteric access sheath use during flexible ureteroscopy: A comparative study on efficacy and safety

Objetivos Este estudio evalúa el impacto del uso de una vaina de acceso ureteral (VAU) durante la ureteroscopia flexible (URSf) para el tratamiento de la litiasis urinaria, centrándose en resultados como la tasa libre de litiasis, el tiempo quirúrgico y las complicaciones. Métodos Este estudio prospectivo y aleatorizado se llevó a cabo en el Hospital de Badr en la Universidad de Helwan y en los hospitales de la Universidad de Ain Shams, desde agosto de 2021 hasta agosto de 2022. Los pacientes se aleatorizaron sistemáticamente a 2 grupos (URSf con VAU: 33 pacientes y URSf sin VAU: 31 pacientes), y se sometieron a evaluaciones preoperatorias y postoperatorias, incluyendo pruebas de laboratorio y de imagen. Se controlaron los posibles riesgos asociados al procedimiento, como el fracaso en el acceso al cálculo, el dolor, el sangrado y la sepsis. Resultados Se observó que los 2 grupos eran comparables en cuanto a características demográficas o hallazgos preoperatorios de la litiasis (p>0,05 para todos). Sin embargo, el tiempo quirúrgico fue menor en el grupo tratado sin VAU (79,4±15,3 vs. 90,4±16,7min en el grupo tratado con VAU; p=0,008). Las tasas de complicaciones intraoperatorias, incluidos el fracaso del acceso, la interrupción de la operación, las lesiones ureterales y el sangrado, fueron comparables en ambos grupos (p>0,05). No se observaron diferencias significativas en cuanto a la tasa libre de litiasis postoperatoria (78,8 vs. 71,0%; p=0,305) y el tamaño litiásico residual medio (2,7±3,5 vs. 3,1±3,1mm; p=0,687). Conclusiones El presente estudio sugiere que URSf sin VAU puede ofrecer una opción eficiente e igualmente efectiva para el tratamiento de los cálculos renales y de uréter superior. Sin embargo, se necesitan más estudios con muestras de mayor tamaño y periodos de seguimiento más largos para validar estos resultados y establecer indicaciones más precisas para este procedimiento. (AU)

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>.05 for all). However, operation duration was shorter in the No Sheath group (79.4±15.3minutes vs. 90.4±16.7minutes in the Sheath group, P=.008). Intraoperative complication rates, including failed access, operation termination, ureteric injury, and bleeding, were comparable in both groups (P>.05). Postoperative stone-free rates (78.8% vs. 71.0%, P=.305) and mean residual stone size (2.7±3.5mm vs. 3.1±3.1mm, P=.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. (AU)

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 ±â€¯15.3 min vs. 90.4 ±â€¯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 ±â€¯3.5 mm vs. 3.1 ±â€¯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.