Search

This review addresses the management of urolithiasis in renal transplant recipients, a notably vulnerable group due to the unique anatomical and physiological alterations of the transplanted organ. The prevalence of nephrolithiasis in these patients varies between 0.1% and 6.3%, with a significant impact on graft longevity and function. Surgical access complications due to the renal graft's position on the iliac vessels and the variety of urinary anastomoses complicate the treatment approaches. This study evaluates the effectiveness and outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and ureteroscopy (URS), two primary minimally invasive strategies for managing graft stones. Through a narrative review using the PubMed and EMBASE databases, it was found that PCNL offers high stone-free rates especially beneficial for large stones, whereas URS provides a less invasive option with a lower risk of complications for small stones. Both techniques require tailored approaches based on stone composition-mostly calcium oxalate-and specific patient anatomical factors. This review underscores the importance of early diagnosis, appropriate treatment selection, and continuous post-treatment monitoring to mitigate risks and promote long-term renal function in transplant recipients.

The ureteral access sheath (UAS) has been a boon and a bane in flexible ureteroscopy (FURS), with its merits and demerits well established. Its design and dimensions were instrumental in reshaping the way flexible scopes were used and were key adjuncts to establishing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) as a standard of care in the endourological management of renal stones. With the ever-changing landscape of RIRS over the decades shaped by technological advancements in lasers and flexible scopes, the UAS has also continuously evolved. The utility of suction in endourology has recently changed the way RIRS is performed and is a game changer for FURS outcomes. With strong clinical and experimental evidence to support its use, the UAS has undergone a transformative change in the recent past, with its ability to monitor intrarenal pressure and provide a superior vacuum-cleaner effect that improves the trifecta of RIRS, namely an improved single-stage stone-free rate (SFR), minimise complications, and reduce reinterventions. Our comprehensive review outlines the key clinical and experimental evidence and traces the developments that were key to modifying the traditional UAS into a flexible and navigable suction ureteric access sheath (FANS) and highlights how the design and modifications, in turn, influence the ability to push the boundaries of RIRS.

Background: An accurate estimation of the stone burden is the key factor for predicting retrograde intra-renal surgical outcomes. Volumetric calculations better stratify stone burden than linear measurements. We developed a free software to assess the stone volume and estimate the lithotrity duration according to 3D-segmented stone volumes, namely the Kidney Stone Calculator (KSC). The present study aimed to validate the KSC's reproducibility in clinical cases evaluating its inter-observer and intra-observer correlations., Methods: Fifty patients that harbored renal stones were retrospectively selected from a prospective cohort. For each patient, three urologists with different experience levels in stone management made five measurements of the stone volume on non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography (NCCT) images using the KSC., Results: the overall inter-observer correlation (Kendall's concordance coefficient) was 0.99 ( p < 0.0001). All three paired analyses of the inter-observer reproducibility were superior to 0.8. The intra-observer variation coefficients varied from 4% to 6%, and Kendall's intra-observer concordance coefficient was found to be superior to 0.98 ( p < 0.0001) for each participant. Subgroup analyses showed that the segmentation of complex stones seems to be less reproductible., Conclusions: The Kidney Stone Calculator is a reliable tool for the stone burden estimation. Its extension for calculating the lithotrity duration is of major interest and could help the practitioner in surgical planning., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose other than the following: Olivier Traxer is a consultant for the Boston Scientific Corporation, Coloplast, Quanta System, Rocamed, Wolf, Court Medical, B-Braun, and IPG. Steeve Doizi is a consultant for the Boston Scientific Corporation and Coloplast. Frederic Panthier is a consultant for Dornier.

Introduction: Thulium lasers (TLs), namely the Thulium fiber laser (TFL) and the Thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG), are being increasingly adopted for the conservative treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). However, to date, the real clinical impact of TLs on UTUC management remains not well-characterized. We performed a review of the literature to summarize the current evidence on TLs for UTUC treatment., Materials and Methods: We performed a systematic review in January 2023 using the Embase and Medline online databases, according to the PRISMA recommendations and using the PICO criteria. Outcomes of interest were: (i) to assess the safety and feasibility of TLs in the treatment of UTUC, and (ii) to evaluate the oncological outcomes in terms of tumor recurrence and conservative treatment failure. Moreover, we described TL characteristics and its interaction with soft tissue., Results: a total of 458 articles were screened, and six full texts including 273 patients were identified. All the included studies were retrospective series. Mean patient age ranged from 66 to 73 years. The indication of a conservative treatment was elective and imperative in 21.7-85% and 15-76% of cases, respectively. Laser power settings varied from 5 to 50 W. No intraoperative complications were reported, and all the procedures were successfully performed. The tumor recurrence rate was 17.7-44%, and the indication to radical nephroureterectomy was 3.7-44% during a follow-up of 6-50 months. Most of the postoperative complications were mild and transient, and ureteral strictures were reported in two studies. Major limitations were the retrospective nature of the studies, the small sample sizes, and the short follow-up., Conclusions: TL is an effective and safe technology for endoscopic UTUC treatment. However, current available literature lacks prospective and multicentric studies with large population sizes and long-term follow-up.

Objective: The aim of this review is to summarize the existing suction systems in flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) and to evaluate their effectiveness and safety., Methods: A narrative review was performed using the Pubmed and Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) databases. Additionally, we conducted a search on the Twitter platform. Studies including suctions systems in fURS were included. Editorials, letters and studies reporting intervention with semirigid ureteroscopy, PCNL and mPCNL were excluded., Results: A total of 12 studies were included in this review. These studies comprised one in vitro study, one ex vivo study, one experimental study and eight cohort studies. The Pubmed and WoSCC searches identified three suction techniques (Irrigation/Suctioning system with control of pressure, suction ureteral access sheath (sUAS) and direct in scope suction (DISS)), and the Twitter search identified four of them. The overall results showed that suction is an effective and safe technique that improves stone-free rates, reduces operative time and limits complication rates after fURS., Conclusions: The use of suctioning during common endourological procedures has been shown to improve safety and efficacy in several indications. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this.

(1) Objective: To support the efficacy and safety of a range of thulium fiber laser (TFL) pre-set parameters for laser lithotripsy: the efficiency is compared against the Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) laser in the hands of juniors and experienced urologists using an in vitro ureteral model; the ureteral damage of both lasers is evaluated in an in vivo porcine model. (2) Materials and Methods: Ho:YAG laser technology and TFL technology, with a 200 µm core-diameter laser fibers in an in vitro saline ureteral model were used. Each participant performed 12 laser sessions. Each session included a 3-min lasering of stone phantoms (Begostone) with each laser technology in six different pre-settings retained from the Coloplast TFL Drive user interface pre-settings, for stone dusting: 0.5 J/10 Hz, 0.5 J/20 Hz, 0.7 J/10 Hz, 0.7 J/20 Hz, 1 J/12 Hz and 1 J/20 Hz. Both lasers were also used in three in vivo porcine models, lasering up to 20 W and 12 W in the renal pelvis and the ureter, respectively. Temperature was continuously recorded. After 3 weeks, a second look was done to verify the integrity of the ureters and kidney and an anatomopathological analysis was performed. (3) Results: Regarding laser lithotripsy efficiency, after 3 min of continuous lasering, the overall ablation rate (AR) percentage was 27% greater with the TFL technology (p < 0.0001). The energy per ablated mass [J/mg] was 24% lower when using the TFL (p < 0.0001). While junior urologists performed worse than seniors in all tests, they performed better when using the TFL than Ho:YAG technology (36% more AR and 36% fewer J/mg). In the in vivo porcine model, no urothelial damage was observed for both laser technologies, neither endoscopically during lasering, three weeks later, nor in the pathological test. (4) Conclusions: By using Coloplast TFL Drive GUI pre-set, TFL lithotripsy efficiency is higher than Ho:YAG laser, even in unexperienced hands. Concerning urothelial damage, both laser technologies with low power present no lesions.

(1) Introduction: To evaluate the feasibility of measuring the intrapelvic pressure (IPP) during flexible ureterorenoscopy (f-URS) with a PressureWire and to optimize safety by assessing IPP during surgery. (2) Methods: Patients undergoing f-URS for different treatments were recruited. A PressureWire (0.014", St. Jude Medical, Little Canada, MN, USA) was placed into the renal cavities to measure IPP. Gravity irrigation at 40 cmH 2 O over the patient and a hand-assisted irrigation system were used. Pressures were monitored in real time and recorded for analysis. Fluid balance and postoperative urinary tract infection (UTI) were documented. (3) Results: Twenty patients undergoing f-URS were included with successful IPP monitoring. The median baseline IPP was 13.6 (6.8-47.6) cmH 2 O. After the placement of the UAS, the median IPP was 17 (8-44.6) cmH 2 O. With irrigation pressure set at 40 cmH 2 O without forced irrigation, the median IPP was 34 (19-81.6) cmH 2 O. Median IPP during laser lithotripsy, with and without the use of on-demand forced irrigation, was 61.2 (27.2-149.5) cmH 2 O. The maximum pressure peaks recorded during forced irrigation ranged from 54.4 to 236.6 cmH 2 O. After the surgery, 3 patients (15%) presented UTI; 2 of them had a positive preoperative urine culture, previously treated, and a positive fluid balance observed after the surgery. (4) Conclusion: Based on our experience, continuous monitoring of IPP with a wire is easy to reproduce, effective, and safe. In addition, it allows us to identify and avoid high IPPs, which may affect surgery-related complications.

Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is accepted as a primary modality for the management of renal stones up to 2 cm. The limitations of RIRS in larger volume stones include limited visualization due to the snow-globe effect and persistence of fragments that cannot be removed. We describe a new, simple, cost-effective modification that can be attached to any flexible ureteroscope which allows simultaneous/alternating suction and aspiration during/after laser lithotripsy using the scope as a conduit to remove the fragments or dust from the pelvicalyceal system called direct in-scope suction (DISS) technique. Between September 2020 and September 2021, 30 patients with kidney stones underwent RIRS with the DISS technique. They were compared with 28 patients who underwent RIRS with a 11Fr/13Fr suction ureteral access sheaths (SUASs) in the same period. RIRS and laser lithotripsy were carried out traditionally with a Holmium laser for the SUAS group or a thulium fiber laser for the DISS group. There was no difference in age, gender, and history of renal lithiasis between the two groups. Ten (40%) patients had multiple stones in the DISS groups, whilst there were no patients with multiple stones in the SUAS group. Median stone size was significantly higher in the DISS group [22.0 (18.0−28.8) vs. 13.0 (11.8−15.0) millimeters, p < 0.001]. Median surgical time was significantly longer in the DISS group [80.0 (60.0−100) minutes] as compared to the SUAS group [47.5 (41.5−60.3) minutes, p < 0.001]. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the DISS group [1.00 (0.667−1.00) vs. 1.00 (1.00−2.00) days, p = 0.02]. Postoperative complications were minor, and there was no significant difference between the two groups. The incidence of residual fragments did not significantly differ between the two groups [10 (33.3%) in the DISS group vs. 10 (35.7%) in the SUAS group, p = 0.99] but 10 (33.3%) patients required a further RIRS for residual fragments in the DISS group, whilst only one (3.6%) patient in the SUAS group required a subsequent shock wave lithotripsy treatment. Our audit study highlighted that RIRS with DISS technique was feasible with an acceptable rate of retreatment as compared to RIRS with SUAS.

The introduction of robotics has revolutionized surgery. Robotic platforms have also recently been introduced in clinical practice specifically for flexible ureteroscopy. In this paper, we look at the robotic platforms currently available for flexible ureteroscopy, describing their advantages and limitations. The following robotic platforms are discussed: Roboflex Avicenna ® , EasyUretero ® , and ILY ® robot. Finally, potential future advancements in this field are presented.

Ureteral access sheaths (UASs) are part of urologist's armamentarium when performing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Recently, the world of RIRS has changed dramatically with the development of three game-changers: thulium fiber laser (TFL), smaller size single use digital flexible ureterosopes and intraoperative intrarenal pressure (IRP) measurement devices. We aimed to clarify the impact of UASs on IRP, complications and SFRs and put its indications in perspective of these three major technological improvements. A systematic review of the literature using the Medline, Scopus and Web of Science databases was performed by two authors and relevant studies were selected according to PRISMA guidelines. Recent studies showed that using a UAS lowers IRP and intrarenal temperature by increasing irrigation outflow during RIRS. Data on the impact of a UAS on SFRs, postoperative pain, risk of infectious complications, risk of ureteral strictures and risk of bladder recurrence of urothelial carcinoma after diagnostic RIRS were inconclusive. Prestenting for at least one week resulted in ureteral enlargement, while the influence of pre-operative administration of alpha-blockers was unclear. Since TFL, smaller single use digital ureteroscopes and devices with integrated pressure-measuring and aspiration technology seemed to increase SFRs and decrease pressure and temperature related complications, indications on the use of a UAS may decrease in the near future.

Moses technology was born with the aim of controlling the Moses effect present in every single Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy. The capacity to divide the energy pulse into two sub-pulses gained popularity due to the fact that most of the energy would be delivered in the second pulse. However, is this pulse modulation technique really better for endocorporeal laser lithoripsy? A review of the literature was performed and all relevant clinical trials of Moses 1.0 and 2.0, as well as the lab studies of Moses 2.0 carried out up to June 2022 were selected. The search came back with 11 clinical experiences (10 full-text clinical trials and one peer-reviewed abstract) with Moses 1.0 and Moses 2.0, and three laboratory studies (peer-reviewed abstracts) with Moses 2.0 only. The clinical experiences confirmed that the MT (1.0) has a shorter lasing time but lower laser efficacy, because it consumes more J/mm 3 when compared with the LP Ho:YAG laser (35 W). This gain in lasing time did not provide enough savings for the medical center. Additionally, in most comparative studies of MT (1.0) vs. the regular mode of the HP Ho:YAG laser, the MT did not have a significant different lasing time, operative time or stone-free rate. Clinical trials with Moses 2.0 are lacking. From what has been published until now, the use of higher frequencies (up to 120 Hz) consumes more total energy and J/mm 3 than Moses 1.0 for similar stone-free rates. Given the current evidence that we have, there are no high-quality studies that support the use of HP Ho:YAG lasers with MT over other lasers, such as LP Ho:YAG lasers or TFL lasers.

Introduction: One of the main limitations of Ho:YAG lithotripsy is represented by its advancement speed. The need for faster lithotripsy has led to the introduction of high-power laser equipment. This general trend in increasing Ho:YAG lithotripsy power has certain points that deserve to be considered and analyzed. The objective is to carry out a narrative review on intrarenal temperature and pressure during ureteroscopy., Methods: A literature search using PUBMED database from inception to December 2021 was performed. The analysis involved a narrative synthesis., Results: Using more power in the laser correlates with an increase in temperature that can be harmful to the kidney. This potential risk can be overcome by increasing either the irrigation inflow or outflow. Increasing irrigant flow can lead to high intrarenal temperature (IRP). The factors that allow the reduction of intrarenal pressure are a low irrigation flow, the use of a ureteral access sheath of adequate diameter according to the equipment used, and the occupation of the working channel by the laser or basket., Conclusion: To maintain a safe temperature profile, it has been proposed to use chilled irrigation fluid, intermittent laser activation or to increase irrigation flow. This last recommendation can lead to increased IRP, which can be overcome by using a UAS. Another option is to use low power laser configurations in order to avoid temperature increases and not require high irrigation flows.

Background: Endocorporeal laser lithotripsy (EL) during flexible ureteroscopy (URS-f) often uses "dusting" settings with "painting" technique. The displacement velocity of the laser fiber (LF) at the stone surface remains unknown and could improve EL's ablation rates. This in vitro study aimed to define the optimal displacement velocity (ODV) for both holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (Tm-Fiber)., Methods: A 50W-TFL (IRE Polus ® , Moscow, Russia) and a 30W-MH1-Ho:YAG laser (Rocamed ® , Signes, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France), were used with 272 µm-Core-Diameter LF (Sureflex, Boston Scientific © , San Jose, CA, USA), comparing three TFL modes, "fine dusting" (FD: 0.05-0.15 J/100-600 Hz); "dusting" (D: 0.5 J/30-60 Hz); "fragmentation" (Fr: 1 J/15-30 Hz) and two Ho:YAG modes (D: 0.5 J/20 Hz, Fr: 1 J/15 Hz). An experimental setup consisting of immerged cubes of calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM) stone phantoms (Begostone Plus, Bego © , Lincoln, RI, USA) was used with a 2 s' laser operation time. LF were in contact with the stones, static or with a displacement of 5, 10 or 20 mm. Experiments were repeated four times. Stones were dried and µ-scanned. Ablation volumes (mm 3 ) were measured by 3D-segmentation., Results: ODV was higher in dusting compared to fragmentation mode during Ho:YAG lithotripsy (10 mm/s vs. 5 mm/s, respectively). With Tm-Fiber, dusting and fragmentation OVDs were similar (5 mm/s). Tm-Fiber ODV was lower than Ho:YAGs in dusting settings (5 mm/s vs. 10 mm/s, respectively). Without LF displacement, ablation volumes were at least two-fold higher with Tm-Fiber compared to Ho:YAG. Despite the LF-DV, we report a 1.5 to 5-fold higher ablation volume with Tm-Fiber compared to Ho:YAG., Conclusions: In dusting mode, the ODV Tm-Fiber is lower compared to ODV Ho:YAG , translating to a potential easier Tm-Fiber utilization for "painting" dusting technique. The ODV determinants remain unknown. Dynamic ablation volumes are higher to static ones, regardless of the laser source, settings or LF displacement velocity.

Thirty-three years ago, pulsed lasers marked the beginning of a new era in endoscopic lithotripsy, and the one that was highlighted because of its potential was the Holmium: YAG laser, which became and still is the gold standard in endourology. Recently, a new laser technology has been accepted for clinical use in lithotripsy: the thulium fiber laser (TFL), showing appealing characteristics not seen before in several preclinical studies. A review of the literature was performed and all relevant in vitro studies and clinical trials until April 2021 were selected. The search came back with 27 clinical experiences (7 full-text clinical trials and 20 peer-reviewed abstracts) and 33 laboratory studies (18 full-text articles and 15 peer-reviewed abstracts). The clinical experiences confirmed the clinical safety of using the wide parameter range of the TFL. This technology demonstrated the performance at a higher ablation speed, the higher ablation efficiency, and the better dust quality of the TFL, as well as reduced stone retropulsion, thus helping to maintain an optimal visibility. No thermal or radiation damage was found. Given the current evidence, we may be facing the future gold standard laser in endoscopic lithotripsy.

Objectives: To compare the risk of laser fiber fracture between Ho:YAG laser and Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL) with different laser fiber diameters, laser settings, and fiber bending radii., Methods: Lengths of 200, 272, and 365 μm single use fibers were used with a 30 W Ho:YAG laser and a 50 W Super Pulsed TFL. Laser fibers of 150 µm length were also tested with the TFL only. Five different increasingly smaller bend radii were tested: 1, 0.9, 0.75, 0.6, and 0.45 cm. A total of 13 different laser settings were tested for the Ho:YAG laser: six fragmentation settings with a short pulse duration, and seven dusting settings with a long pulse duration. A total of 33 different laser settings were tested for the TFL. Three laser settings were common two both lasers: 0.5 J × 12 Hz, 0.8 J × 8 Hz, 2 J × 3 Hz. The laser was activated for 5 min or until fiber fracture. Each measurement was performed ten times., Results: While fiber failures occurred with all fiber diameters with Ho:YAG laser, none were reported with TFL. Identified risk factors of fiber fracture with the Ho:YAG laser were short pulse and high energy for the 365 µm fibers ( p = 0.041), but not for the 200 and 272 µm fibers ( p = 1 and p = 0.43, respectively). High frequency was not a risk factor of fiber fracture. Fiber diameter also seemed to be a risk factor of fracture. The 200 µm fibers broke more frequently than the 272 and 365 µm ones ( p = 0.039). There was a trend for a higher number of fractures with the 365 µm fibers compared to the 272 µm ones, these occurring at a larger bend radius, but this difference was not significant., Conclusion: TFL appears to be a safer laser regarding the risk of fiber fracture than Ho:YAG when used with fibers in a deflected position.

Kidney stone disease (KSD) is a complex disease. Besides the high risk of recurrence, its association with systemic disorders contributes to the burden of disease. Sufficient water intake is crucial for prevention of KSD, however, the mineral content of water might influence stone formation, bone health and cardiovascular (CVD) risk. This study aims to analyse the variations in mineral content of bottled drinking water worldwide to evaluate the differences and describes the possible impact on nephrological and urological diseases. The information regarding mineral composition (mg/L) on calcium, bicarbonate, magnesium, sodium and sulphates was read from the ingredients label on water bottles by visiting the supermarket or consulting the online shop. The bottled waters in two main supermarkets in 21 countries were included. The evaluation shows that on a global level the mineral composition of bottled drinkable water varies enormously. Median bicarbonate levels varied by factors of 12.6 and 57.3 for still and sparkling water, respectively. Median calcium levels varied by factors of 18.7 and 7.4 for still and sparkling water, respectively. As the mineral content of bottled drinking water varies enormously worldwide and mineral intake through water might influence stone formation, bone health and CVD risk, urologists and nephrologists should counsel their patients on an individual level regarding water intake.