RESUMO
Objetivo Identificar los últimos avances en los dispositivos de aspiración para la cirugía retrógrada intrarrenal (CRIR) y la ureteroscopia en el tratamiento de la litiasis, y evaluar los resultados de su aplicación. Procedimiento El 4 de enero de 2023 se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica sistemática en Scopus, PubMed y EMBASE. Solo se incluyeron artículos en inglés; se aceptaron estudios en la población pediátrica y estudios en adultos. Se excluyeron los estudios duplicados, los informes de casos, las cartas al editor y los resúmenes de congresos. Hallazgos principales Se seleccionaron 21 trabajos. Se han propuesto varios sistemas de aspiración para la CRIR: a través de la vaina de acceso ureteral o directamente por el endoscopio. La inteligencia artificial también puede desempeñar un papel, monitorizando los valores de la presión y del flujo de irrigación. Todas las técnicas propuestas mostraron resultados perioperatorios satisfactorios en cuanto a tiempo quirúrgico, tasa libre de cálculos (TLC) y fragmentos residuales. Además, la reducción de la presión intrarrenal (mediante la aspiración) también se asoció a una tasa de infección menor. Incluso los estudios que incluyen cálculos renales con un diámetro de 20mm o superior informan de una mayor TLC y una reducción de las complicaciones postoperatorias. Sin embargo, la falta de parámetros bien establecidos para la presión de la aspiración y el flujo de líquido impide la estandarización del procedimiento. Conclusión Como ha sido demostrado en los estudios incluidos, el uso de dispositivos de aspiración en el tratamiento quirúrgico de los cálculos urinarios favorece la obtención de una TLC mayor y reduce las complicaciones infecciosas. La CRIR con sistema de aspiración podría sustituir a la técnica tradicional, gracias a sus ventajas asociadas al control de la presión intrarrenal y aspiración del polvo fino. (AU)
Objective To identify the latest advances in suction devices and evaluate their effect in Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and ureteroscopy for stones. Basic procedures A systematic literature search was performed on 4th January 2023 using Scopus, PubMed, and EMBASE. Only English papers were included; both pediatric and adult studies were accepted. Duplicate studies, case reports, letters to the editor, and meeting abstracts were excluded. Main findings Twenty-one papers were selected. Several methods have been proposed for suction use in RIRS, such as through the ureteral access sheath or directly to the scope. Artificial intelligence can also regulate this system, monitoring pressure and perfusion flow values. All the proposed techniques showed satisfactory perioperative results for operative time, stone-free rate (SFR), and residual fragments. Moreover, the reduction of intrarenal pressure (induced by aspiration) was also associated with a lower infection rate. Even the studies that considered kidney stones with a diameter of 20mm or higher reported higher SFR and reduced postoperative complications. However, the lack of well-defined settings for suction pressure and fluid flow prevents the standardization of the procedure. Conclusion Aspiration device in the surgical treatment of urinary stones favours a higher SFR, reducing infectious complications, as supported by the included studies. RIRS with a suction system provided to be a natural successor to the traditional technique, regulating intrarenal pressure and aspirating fine dust. (AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Sucção/instrumentação , Nefrolitíase/cirurgiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To identify the latest advances in suction devices and evaluate their effect in Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and ureteroscopy for stones. BASIC PROCEDURES: A systematic literature search was performed on 4th January 2023 using Scopus, PubMed, and EMBASE. Only English papers were included; both pediatric and adult studies were accepted. Duplicate studies, case reports, letters to the editor, and meeting abstracts were excluded. MAIN FINDINGS: Twenty-one papers were selected. Several methods have been proposed for suction use in RIRS, such as through the ureteral access sheath or directly to the scope. Artificial intelligence can also regulate this system, monitoring pressure and perfusion flow values. All the proposed techniques showed satisfactory perioperative results for operative time, stone-free rate (SFR), and residual fragments. Moreover, the reduction of intrarenal pressure (induced by aspiration) was also associated with a lower infection rate. Even the studies that considered kidney stones with a diameter of 20 mm or higher reported higher SFR and reduced postoperative complications. However, the lack of well-defined settings for suction pressure and fluid flow prevents the standardization of the procedure. CONCLUSION: Aspiration device in the surgical treatment of urinary stones favours a higher SFR, reducing infectious complications, as supported by the included studies. RIRS with a suction system provided to be a natural successor to the traditional technique, regulating intrarenal pressure and aspirating fine dust.
Assuntos
Cálculos Renais , Ureter , Adulto , Humanos , Criança , Inteligência Artificial , Sucção , Resultado do Tratamento , Cálculos Renais/cirurgiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of pre-stented (PS) versus non-pre-stented (NPS) patients who have undergone retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal calculi with subgroup analysis of Asian and non-Asian cohorts. METHODS: Protocol is registered in PROSPERO, CRD42021261123. Eligible studies identified from four electronic databases. Meta-analysis was done to enumerate the outcomes of RIRS in between PS and NPS. Secondary sub-analysis was done to look for differences in outcomes in Asian and non-Asian cohorts. RESULTS: Fourteen studies involving 3831 patients (4 prospective, 10 retrospective studies) were included. PS patients experienced higher success rates of ureteral access sheath (UAS) insertion than NPS (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.05-1.13, p < 0.00001). PS patients had lower risk of ureteral injuries from UAS placement (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.96, p = 0.03). No significant differences in intra- and postoperative complications between two groups were found. Stone-free rate (SFR) outcomes for residual fragment (RF) cut-off of < 1 mm and < 4 mm favoured the PS patients (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.17, p = 0.002 for < 4 mm, RR1.10, 95% CI 1.02-1.19, p = 0.02 for < 1 mm). In the subgroup analysis, PS Asian patients had similar SFR as NPS patients for SFR(< 4 mm) but non-Asian population showed better outcomes in the PS patients for SFR(< 4 mm) (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.13-1.52, p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that pre-stenting results in a higher success for UAS placement, minimising intraoperative ureteric injury, with higher overall SFR for any RF cut-off in PS cohorts. In non-Asian cohort, significant differences occurred at SFR < 4 mm but not for SFR < 1 mm. No difference was seen in our Asian cohort for any SFR cut-off in both PS and NPS patients.
