Retrograde intrarenal surgery with or without ureteral access sheath: a systematic re-view and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: The ureteral access sheath (UAS) is a medical device that enables repeated entrance into the ureter and collecting system during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Its impact on stone-free rates, ureteral injuries, operative time, and postoperative complications remains controversial. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing RIRS with versus without UAS for urolithiasis management. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes from retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for stone extraction with or without ureteral access sheath (UAS); evaluating stone-free rate (SFR), ureteral injuries, operative time, and postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in June 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety outcomes of UAS use in RIRS for urolithiasis treatment. Articles published between 2014 and 2024 were included. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) were calculated for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: Five RCTs comprising 466 procedures were included. Of these, 246 (52.7%) utilized UAS. The follow-up ranged from 1 week to 1 month. UAS reduced the incidence of postoperative fever (RR 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.84; p=0.009), and postoperative infection (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.30-0.83; p=0.008). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of SFR (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.99-1.11; p=0.10), ureteral injuries (RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.95-1.75; p=0.11), operative time (MD 3.56 minutes; 95% CI -4.15 to 11.27 minutes; p=0.36), or length of stay (MD 0.32 days; 95% CI -0.42 to 1.07 days; p=0.40). CONCLUSION: UAS leads to a lower rate of post-operative fever and infection. However, UAS did not significantly reduce or increase the SFR or the rate of ureteral injuries during RIRS for patients with urolithiasis. The use of UAS should be considered to decrease the risk of infectious complications, particularly in those who may be at higher risk for such complications.

Ureteroscopy vs laparoscopic ureterolithotomy for large proximal ureteric stone: a randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) with retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RLU) for large proximal ureteric stones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective randomised trial was conducted from January 2018 through December 2022 including patients with impacted proximal ureteric stones of 15-25 mm. Patients underwent fURS or RLU. Primary outcome was the stone-free rate. Demographic data, stone features, and complications rates were also compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients were enrolled, 32 in each group. The mean impacted stone time was similar between groups, as well as stone size (17 mm) and stone density (>1000 Hounsfield Units). The ureteric stone-free rates between the two groups (93.7% in fURS vs 96.8% in RLU; odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.72 to 3.17; P = 0.554), and overall success rates, which take into account residual fragments in the kidney (84.3% in fURS vs 93.7% in RLU; OR 1.02, 95% CI -0.69 to 2.74; P = 0.23), were similar. Operative time was also not statistically significantly different between groups (median 80 vs 82 min; P = 0.101). There was no difference in hospital length of stay. Retropulsion rate was higher with fURS (65.6% vs 3.1%; p < 0.001). Residual hydronephrosis (34.3% each group) and complication rates did no differ according to treatment. CONCLUSION: Flexible URS and RLU are both highly efficient and present low morbidity for large impacted proximal ureteric stone treatment. RLU is not superior to fURS.

The Application of Next-Generation Sequencing in Preoperative Evaluation for Urologic Stone Surgery.

Introduction: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a new molecular technique for identifying microorganisms. Treating bacteriuria in patients undergoing stone removal procedures is important for preventing postoperative urinary tract infection (UTI). The objective of this study is to assess the usefulness of preoperative urine NGS testing by comparing NGS with standard urine culture in predicting postoperative UTI after ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted from February 16, 2022, to January 11, 2024. Sixty subjects who underwent URSL or PCNL were included. Preoperative voided urine samples were collected for urine culture and tested by MicroGenDX for urine polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and urine NGS. Stone specimens obtained intraoperatively were also sent for stone culture and MicrogenDx. Patients were monitored for 4 weeks post-operation for recording clinical outcomes related to infections and complications. Results: Twenty-six (43.3%) male and 34 (56.7%) female participants were included. Twenty-six (43.3%) patients underwent PCNL (15 standard PCNL and 11 mini PCNL), and 34 (56.7%) underwent URSL. Standard urine culture identified positive results in 26 cases (43.3%), PCR for 17 cases (28.3%), and NGS for 31 cases (51.7%). The overall postoperative UTI rate was 6 (10%). Standard urine culture demonstrated a sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 57.4%, and accuracy of 56.7%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was notably poor at 11.5%. Urine NGS showed a higher sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 53.7%, accuracy of 55%, and PPV of 16.7%. Conclusion: Urine NGS significantly improves the sensitivity of detecting microorganisms in preoperative urine compared with standard urine culture. Despite its high sensitivity and capability to identify nonculturable bacteria, using NGS alongside standard urine culture is recommended. This parallel approach harnesses the strengths of both methods. Integrating NGS into standard practice could elevate the quality of care, especially for patients at high risk of UTIs, such as those undergoing invasive stone removal procedures.

Artificial Intelligence in Endourology: Maximizing the Promise Through Consideration of the Principles of Diffusion of Innovation Theory.

Introduction: Diffusion of Innovation Theory explains how ideas or products gain momentum and diffuse (or spread) through specific populations or social systems over time. The theory analyzes primary influencers of the spread of new ideas, including the innovation itself, communication channels, time, and social systems. Methods: The current study reviewed published medical literature to identify studies and applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in endourology and used E.M. Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation Theory to analyze the primary influencers of the adoption of AI in endourological care. The insights gained were triaged and prioritized into AI application-related action items or "tips" for facilitating the appropriate diffusion of the most valuable endourological innovations. Results: Published medical literature indicates that AI is still a research-based tool in endourology and is not widely used in clinical practice. The published studies have presented AI models and algorithms to assist with stone disease detection (n = 17), the prediction of management outcomes (n = 18), the optimization of operative procedures (n = 9), and the elucidation of stone disease chemistry and composition (n = 24). Five tips for facilitating appropriate adoption of endourological AI are: (1) Develop/prioritize training programs to establish the foundation for effective use; (2) create appropriate data infrastructure for implementation, including its maintenance and evolution over time; (3) deliver AI transparency to gain the trust of endourology stakeholders; (4) adopt innovations in the context of continuous quality improvement Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles as these approaches have proven track records for improving care quality; and (5) be realistic about what AI can/cannot currently do and document to establish the basis for shared understanding. Conclusion: Diffusion of Innovation Theory provides a framework for analyzing the influencers of the adoption of AI in endourological care. The five tips identified through this research may be used to facilitate appropriate diffusion of the most valuable endourological innovations.

What is the definition of stone dust and how does it compare with clinically insignificant residual fragments? A comprehensive review.

PURPOSE: During endoscopic stone surgery, Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL) technologies allow to pulverize urinary stones into fine particles, ie DUST. Yet, currently there is no consensus on the exact definition of DUST. This review aimed to define stone DUST and Clinically Insignificant Residual Fragments (CIRF). METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed) and Cochrane databases were searched for both in vitro and in vivo articles relating to DUST and CIRF definitions, in November 2023, using keyword combinations: "dust", "stones", "urinary calculi", "urolithiasis", "residual fragments", "dusting", "fragments", "lasers" and "clinical insignificant residual fragments". RESULTS: DUST relates to the fine pulverization of urinary stones, defined in vitro as particles spontaneously floating with a sedimentation duration ≥ 2 sec and suited for aspiration through a 3.6Fr-working channel (WC) of a flexible ureteroscope (FURS). Generally, an upper size limit of 250 µm seems to agree with the definition of DUST. Ho:YAG with and without "Moses Technology", TFL and the recent pulsed-Thulium:YAG (pTm:YAG) can produce DUST, but no perioperative technology can currently measure DUST size. The TFL and pTm:YAG achieve better dusting compared to Ho:YAG. CIRF relates to residual fragments (RF) that are not associated with imminent stone-related events: loin pain, acute renal colic, medical or interventional retreatment. CIRF size definition has decreased from older studies based on Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) (≤ 4 mm) to more recent studies based on FURS (≤ 2 mm) and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy(PCNL) (≤ 4 mm). RF ≤ 2 mm are associated with lower stone recurrence, regrowth and clinical events rates. While CIRF should be evaluated postoperatively using Non-Contrast Computed Tomography(NCCT), there is no consensus on the best diagnostic modality to assess the presence and quantity of DUST. CONCLUSION: DUST and CIRF refer to independent entities. DUST is defined in vitro by a stone particle size criteria of 250 µm, translating clinically as particles able to be fully aspirated through a 3.6Fr-WC without blockage. CIRF relates to ≤ 2 RF on postoperative NCCT.

URS for de-novo urolithiasis after kidney transplantation: a systematic review of the literature.

INTRODUCTION: There is a gap in the available literature and guidelines concerning the optimal approach for treating allograft stones, which currently include external shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy, or percutaneous nephrolithotomy. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of URS as a treatment option for patients in this scenario. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted until August 2023. Only original articles written in English were considered for inclusion. This review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number CRD42023451154). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eleven articles were included (122 patients). The mean age was 46.9±9.5 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 62:49. The preferred ureteral reimplantation technique was the Lich-Gregoire. The mean onset time was 48.24 months. Acute kidney injury, urinary tract infections and fever were the most frequent clinical presentations (18.3% each), followed by hematuria (10%). The mean stone size measured 9.84 mm (±2.42 mm). Flexible URS was preferred over semirigid URS. The stone-free rate stood at 83.35%, while the overall complication rate was 13.93%, with six (4.9%) major complications reported. Stones were mainly composed of calcium oxalate (42.6%) or uric acid (14.8%). Over an average follow-up period of 30.2 months, the recurrence rate was 2.46%. No significant changes in renal function or allograft loss were reported. CONCLUSIONS: URS remains an efficient choice for addressing de-novo allograft urolithiasis, offering the advantage of treating urinary stones with a good SFR and a low incidence of complications. Procedures should be performed in an Endourology referral center.

Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for De Novo Urolithiasis After Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Introduction and Objective: Renal transplantation is the treatment for end-stage renal disease that offers better quality of life and survival. Among the possible complications that might affect allografts, urolithiasis might have severe consequences, causing acute kidney injury (AKI) or septic events in immunocompromised patients. Allograft stones might be treated with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). The aim of this Cochrane style review was to assess the safety and efficacy of PCNL in patients with renal transplant. Methods: A comprehensive search in the literature was performed including articles between July 1982 and June 2023, with only English original articles selected for this review. Results: The final review encompassed nine articles (108 patients). The mean age was 46.4 ± 8.7 years, with a male:female ratio of 54:44. The average time from transplantation to urolithiasis onset was 47.54 ± 23.9 months. Predominant symptoms upon presentation were AKI (32.3%), followed by urinary tract infection and fever (24.2%), and oliguria (12.9%). The mean stone size was 20.1 ± 7.3 mm, with stones located in the calices or pelvis (41%), ureteropelvic junction (23.1%), or proximal ureter (28.2%). PCNL (22F-30F) was more frequently performed than mini-PCNLs (16F-20F) (52.4% vs 47.6%). Puncture was guided by ultrasound (42.9%), fluoroscopy (14.3%), or both (42.9%). The stone-free rate (SFR) and complication rates were 92.95% (range: 77%-100%) and 5.5%, respectively, with only one major complication reported. Postoperatively, a ureteral stent and nephrostomy were commonly placed in 47%, with four patients needing a second look PCNL. During an average follow-up of 32.5 months, the recurrence rate was 3.7% (4/108), and the mean creatinine level was 1.37 ± 0.28 mg/dL. Conclusions: PCNL remains a safe and effective option in de novo allograft urolithiasis, allowing to treat large stones in one-step surgery. A good SFR is achieved with a low risk of minor complications. These patients should be treated in an endourology center in conjunction with the renal or transplant team.

Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet for Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Thulium fiber laser (TFL) emerged as a competitor of holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for the treatment of urinary stones. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy of renal and ureteral stones. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify reports published until May 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria, and data from 1286 and 880 patients who underwent, respectively, Ho:YAG and TFL laser lithotripsy were reviewed. Most studies included ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgeries as procedures, two included percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and one included URS exclusively. Only two studies reported results in pediatric patients. TFL was associated with a higher SFR (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-3.20; p = 0.031) when no residual fragment is considered, but not when SFR refers to the presence of fragments <3 mm (OR 2.48, 95% CI: 0.98-6.29; p = 0.055) or when only Ho:YAG with MOSES is considered (p = 0.068). According to the stones' location, TFL was associated with higher SFRs than Ho:YAG for renal (OR 3.14, 95% CI: 1.69-5.86; p < 0.001) but not for ureteral (p = 0.8) stones. TFL was associated with a lower intraoperative complication rate (OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.19-0.63; p < 0.001). No difference was found in major (p = 0.4) or overall (p = 0.4) complication rate, operative time (p = 0.051), and laser time (p = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: TFL is a promising laser for the treatment of urinary stones with some advantages over Ho:YAG. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and optimize the surgical settings. PATIENT SUMMARY: The use of thulium fiber laser rather than holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet permits to reach a higher stone-free rate in stones located in the kidney rather than in the ureter.

Can Perioperative Antibiotic Choice Impact Rates of Infectious Complications After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy? A Single-Blind, Prospective Randomized Trial.

Objective: National guidelines recommend periprocedural antibiotics before percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), yet it is not clear which is superior. We conducted a randomized trial to compare two guideline-recommended antibiotics: ciprofloxacin (cipro) vs cefazolin, on PCNL outcomes, focusing on the development of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Methods: Adult patients who were not considered high risk for surgical or infectious complications and undergoing PCNL were randomized to receive either cipro or cefazolin perioperatively. All had negative preoperative urine cultures. Demographic and perioperative data were collected, including SIRS criteria, intraoperative urine culture, duration of hospitalization, and need for intensive care. SIRS is defined by ≥2 of the following: body temperature <96.8°F or >100.4°F, heart rate >90 bpm, respiratory rate >20 per minute, and white blood cell count <4000 or >12,000 cells/mm3. Results: One hundred forty-seven patients were enrolled and randomized (79 cefazolin and 68 cipro). All preoperative characteristics were similar (p > 0.05), except for mean age, which was higher in the cipro group (64 vs 57 years, p = 0.03). Intra- and postoperative findings were similar, with no difference between groups (p > 0.05), except a longer mean hospital stay in the cefazolin group (2 hours longer, p = 0.02). There was no difference between SIRS episodes in both univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusions: Despite the relatively broader coverage for urinary tract pathogens with ciprofloxacin, this prospective randomized trial did not show superiority over cefazolin. Our findings therefore support two appropriate options for perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis in patients undergoing PCNL who are nonhigh risk for infectious complications.

Suction in Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy: Evolution, Development, and Outcomes from Experimental and Clinical studies. Results from a Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Controversy exists regarding the therapeutic benefit of suction use during percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL). OBJECTIVE: To review and highlight the options available in the use of suction for PCNL, and to discuss their strengths and limitations. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature search was performed using Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed. Thirty four studies were included. There was one ex vivo study. Among clinical studies, 24 used a vacuum/suctioning sheath and nine a handpiece suction device/direct-in-scope suction. The suction technique was employed in standard, mini-PCNL, supermini-PCNL, and enhanced supermini­PCNL techniques. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Handpiece suction devices demonstrated better safety and efficiency in treating large stones than nonsuction PCNL and in a much shorter time. Trilogy and ShockPulse-SE were equally effective, safe, and versatile for standard PCNL and mini-PCNL. The heavier handpiece makes Trilogy less ergonomically friendly. Laser suction handpiece devices can potentiate laser lithotripsy by allowing for better laser control with simultaneous suction of small fragments and dust. Integrated suction-based sheaths are available in reusable and disposable forms for mini-PCNL only. Mini-PCNL with suction reported superior outcomes for operative time and stone-free rate to mini-PCNL. This also helped minimize infectious complications by a combination of intrarenal pressure reduction and faster aspiration of irrigation fluid reducing the risk of sepsis, enhance intraoperative vision, and improve lithotripsy efficiency, which makes it a very attractive evolution for PCNL. CONCLUSIONS: Suction devices in PCNL are reforming the way PCNL is being done. Adding suction to mini-PCNL reduces infectious complications and improves the stone-free rate. Our review shows that despite the limited evidence, suction techniques appear to improve PCNL outcomes. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this review, we looked at the intra- and perioperative outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (PCNL) with the addition of suction. With better stone fragmentation and fewer postoperative infections, this technology is very useful particularly for mini-PCNL.

Endoscopic Stone Composition Identification: Is Accuracy Improved by Stone Appearance During Laser Lithotripsy?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if videos during laser lithotripsy increase accuracy and confidence of stone identification by urologists compared to still pictures. METHODS: We obtained representative pictures and videos of 4 major stone types from 8 different patients during ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy. A REDCap survey was created and emailed to members of the Endourological Society. The survey included a picture followed by the corresponding video of each stone undergoing laser lithotripsy and additional clinical information. Each picture and video included multiple-choice questions about stone composition and response confidence level. Accuracy, confidence levels, and rates of rectification (change from incorrect to correct answer) or confounding (correct to incorrect) after watching videos were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-seven urologists responded to the survey. The accuracy rate of stone identification with pictures was 43.8% vs 46.1% with videos (P = .27). Accuracy for individual stones was low and highly variable. Video only improved accuracy for 1 cystine stone. After viewing videos, participants were more likely to rectify vs confound their answers. Urologists were more likely to be confident with videos than pictures alone (65.4% vs 53.7%, respectively; P <.001); however, confident answers were not more likely to yield accurate predictions with videos vs still pictures. CONCLUSION: Stone identification by urologists is marginally improved with videos vs pictures alone. Overall, accuracy in stone identification is low irrespective of confidence level, picture, and lithotripsy video visualization. Urologists should be cautious in using endoscopic stone appearance to direct metabolic management.

Sustainability in Urology: Ideas for a Greener Future.

Sustainability in urology can be achieved via conscientious practices that minimize the negative impact of our services while achieving ethical and responsible patient care. We highlight novel and actionable ideas that could pave the path towards healthier, greener urological practice.

Erector spinae plane blocks for analgesia after percutaneous nephrolithotomy A pathway to reduce opioids.

INTRODUCTION: Despite its minimally invasive nature, percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL ) may be associated with significant pain. Challenges in pain control may prevent timely discharge (and expose patients to adverse effects of opioid use). We sought to evaluate whether our patients who underwent erector spinae plane (ESP) regional blocks experienced improved postoperative pain control and decreased opioid use after PCNL (compared with those who did not receive blocks). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive PCNL cases on patients admitted for greater than 24 hours without pre-existing opioid regimens for chronic pain. Cases were completed by a single high-volume surgeon. Patients who accepted an ESP block were compared to those who did not receive a block. Patients received either a single injection or a disposable pump delivering intermittent boluses of ropivacaine 0.2%. Demographic and perioperative data were analyzed. The primary outcomes were opioid use measured in morphine milligram equivalent (MME ) and patient-reported pain scores during the first 24 hours of hospitalization. RESULTS: From March 2019 to August 2021, 44 patients were identified who met criteria - 28 of whom received an ESP block (including 14 continuous blocks). The patients who received blocks had significantly decreased opioid use (18.3 vs. 81.3 MME, p=0.004) and a longer mean time to first non-zero pain score (p=0.004). Continuous blocks had similar opioid use to single shot blocks (21.0 vs. 15.6 MME, p=0.952). CONCLUSIONS: ESP regional blocks appear to offer an effective adjunct method for pain control after PCNL and may reduce post-PCNL opioid use while maintaining adequate patient analgesia.

Shockwave Lithotripsy for De-Novo Urolithiasis after Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Allograft urolithiasis is an uncommon, challenging, and potentially dangerous clinical problem. Treatment of allograft stones includes external shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), flexible ureteroscopy and lasertripsy (fURSL), or percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). A gap in the literature and guidelines exists regarding the treatment of patients in this setting. The aim of this systematic review was to collect preoperative and treatment characteristics and evaluate the outcomes of post-transplant SWL for stone disease. METHODS: A systematic search in the literature was performed, including articles up to March 2023. Only original English articles were selected. RESULTS: Eight articles (81 patients) were included in the review. Patients were mainly male, with a mean age of 41.9 years (±7.07). The mean stone size was 13.18 mm (±2.28 mm). Stones were predominantly located in the kidney (n = 18, 62%). The overall stone-free rate and complication rates were 81% (range: 50-100%) and 17.2% (14/81), respectively, with only one major complication reported. A pre-operative drainage was placed in eleven (13.5%) patients. Five patients (6.71%) required a second treatment for residual fragments. CONCLUSIONS: SWL is a safe and effective option to treat de novo stones after transplantation. Larger studies are needed to better address allograft urolithiasis management.

Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score Is a Better Predictor of Septic Shock After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Secondary Analysis of Two Multicenter Prospective Trials.

Introduction: Recent retrospective literature suggests that the quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scoring tool is a potentially superior tool over use of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria to predict septic shock after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) surgery. Here we examine use of qSOFA and SIRS to predict septic shock within data series collected prospectively on PCNL patients as part of a greater study of infectious complications. Materials and Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of two prospective multicenter studies including PCNL patients across nine institutions. Clinical signs informing SIRS and qSOFA scores were collected no later than postoperative day 1. The primary outcome was sensitivity and specificity of SIRS and qSOFA (high-risk score of greater-or-equal to two points) in predicting admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for vasopressor support. Results: A total of 218 cases at 9 institutions were analyzed. One patient required vasopressor support in the ICU. The sensitivity/specificity was 100%/72.4% (McNemar's test p < 0.001) for SIRS and was 100%/90.8% (McNemar's test p < 0.001) for qSOFA. Conclusion: Although positive predictive value for both qSOFA and SIRS in prediction of post-PCNL septic shock is low, prospectively collected data demonstrate use of qSOFA may offer greater specificity than SIRS criteria when predicting post-PCNL septic shock.

Prevalence of Stone Disease and Procedure Trends in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of stone disease and procedure trends among US commercial and Medicare populations. METHODS: Retrospective analyses for a US commercial population and Medicare population were conducted using the Merative MarketScan Commercial Database and Medicare Standard Analytic File (5% sample), respectively. Patients aged 18+ were included if they had an encounter in any setting with a primary stone diagnosis or stone procedure (ureteroscopy [URS], percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), or shockwave lithotripsy [SWL]) between 2011 and 2019. Analyses were conducted at the patient level. RESULTS: Over the study time horizon, the prevalence of stone disease showed a small yet statistically significant decrease in the commercial population (1.04%-1.01%; P.ß<.ß0.0001) and a statistically significant increase in the Medicare population (1.84%-2.34%; P.ß<.ß0.0001). URS.ßprocedure volumes increased by 22.6% (P.ß<.ß0.0001) in the commercial population and by 56.6% (P.ß<.ß0.0001) in the Medicare population over the study period. Similarly, PCNL.ßprocedure volumes increased by 17.4% (P.ß<.ß0.0001) in the commercial population and 27.5% (P.ß<.ß0.0001) in the Medicare population. Procedure volumes for SWL decreased by 26.9% in the commercial population (P.ß<.ß0.0001) and by 3.8% in the Medicare population although the results were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of stone disease showed a small decrease in the US commercial population and an increase in the Medicare population over the study time horizon. In both populations, increasing procedure volumes were observed for URS and PCNL while decreasing volumes were observed for SWL.

Sepsis prevalence and associated hospital admission and mortality after ureteroscopy in employed adults.

OBJECTIVE: To determine 30-day inpatient mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, inpatient admissions/readmissions, and yearly trends in sepsis prevalence and inpatient mortality after ureteroscopy (URS) in employed adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database to identify employed adults aged 18-64 years who underwent URS between 2015 and 2019. Patients were categorized as having no sepsis (controls), non-severe sepsis, or severe sepsis within 30 days of URS. The main outcomes included inpatient mortality, ICU admissions, inpatient admissions, readmissions, and annual rates of sepsis and associated inpatient mortality. RESULTS: Among 109 496 patients undergoing URS, 5.6% developed sepsis (4.1% non-severe, 1.5% severe). The 30-day inpatient mortality rates were 0.03%, 0.3% and 2.5% for controls, non-severe sepsis and severe sepsis, respectively (P < 0.001). In a multivariable analysis, diagnosis of sepsis regardless of severity (hazard ratio [HR] 17.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.5-28.1; P < 0.001) or severe sepsis (HR 49.5, 95% CI 28.9-84.7; P < 0.001) increased the risk of 30-day inpatient mortality compared to no sepsis (controls). ICU admissions on the day of procedure (1.5%, 19.8% and 52.4%), inpatient admission rates (18.3%, 74.9% and 76.9%) and readmission rates (7.1%, 12.0% and 15.9%) were higher with severe sepsis and non-severe sepsis vs controls (all P < 0.001). During the study period, the prevalence of sepsis after URS increased from 4.7% to 6.6% (P < 0.001), while the associated mortality rate decreased from 0.7% to 0.2% (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Among working adults aged 18-64 years, sepsis after URS increases the risk of 30-day inpatient mortality, ICU and hospital admission, and hospital readmission. Although the prevalence of sepsis after URS is increasing over time, associated mortality rates are declining. Urologists should be aware of the potentially deadly consequences of sepsis after URS in younger patients.

Long-term follow-up on dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy: a prospective multicenter trial from the EDGE Research Consortium.

In 2018, the Endourology Disease Group for Excellence (EDGE) published a prospective trial comparing dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy. One hundred fifty-nine patients were included in the original analysis, which found no difference in stone-free rate at 3 months. We report the intermediate and long-term outcomes of patients included in the original trial. Two analyses were performed. At 1-year, a retrospective chart review was performed, and data collected on stone episodes, Emergency Department (ED) visits, hospital admissions and surgical interventions. To obtain long-term outcomes, the four sites with the largest initial accrual were included in a second phase of data collection with updated analyses. The patients from those sites were contacted, re-consented, and data were collected on stone surgical interventions, stone episodes, stone recurrences on imaging, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospital admissions for stone-related care since their original procedure. One-year follow-up data were collected in 111 of the original 159 (69.8%) patients from the nine sites. There were no statistically significant differences in the number of painful episodes, ED visits, hospital admissions, or surgical interventions. 94 patients from four sites were included in the long-term analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in surgical interventions, painful stone episodes, stone recurrence on imaging, ED visits or hospitalizations for stone-related events between the two groups. Long-term outcomes of dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy indicate that there are no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two surgical modalities.