The active guidewire technique versus standard technique as different way to approach ureteral endoscopic stone treatment.


Journal

Archivio italiano di urologia, andrologia : organo ufficiale [di] Societa italiana di ecografia urologica e nefrologica
ISSN: 2282-4197
Titre abrégé: Arch Ital Urol Androl
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 9308247

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
20 Dec 2021
Historique:
received: 10 07 2021
accepted: 25 08 2021
entrez: 22 12 2021
pubmed: 23 12 2021
medline: 24 12 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

One of the greatest challenges in semi-rigid ureteroscopies, for both stones and tumors, is the control of endoscopic vision and the maintenance of low intracavitary liquid pressure. We present a comparison between two operative techniques: in the first method an ordinary guide wire (diameter 0.032'') is used for the procedure; in the second one a 5 Fr ureteral catheter replaces the guidewire (we called it "Active guidewire") Methods We compared 50 semirigid ureteroscopies (sURS) performed using the active guidewire with another 50 procedures conducted with a classic guidewire. We evaluated the difference in operating times, quality of endoscopic vision, periprocedural infections rate and stone-free rate. The use of active guidewire has considerably reduced the standardized operating times per unit stone-volume by about 39%. Vision quality has improved considerably thanks to the continuous flow in-and-out. Consequently, periprocedural infections decreased (3% vs 30%) and the stone-free rate rose from 86% to 92%. Employing an "active guidewire" instead of the standard guidewire, the risk of complications related to high pressures and operating time is considerably lower, as well as better treatment quality thanks to the cleaner vision. This technique has proven to be safe as well as easy to apply, and in our belief is to be preferred whenever the ureter accepts without forcing, both the presence of the catheter and the semi-rigid 7 F ureteroscope.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
One of the greatest challenges in semi-rigid ureteroscopies, for both stones and tumors, is the control of endoscopic vision and the maintenance of low intracavitary liquid pressure. We present a comparison between two operative techniques: in the first method an ordinary guide wire (diameter 0.032'') is used for the procedure; in the second one a 5 Fr ureteral catheter replaces the guidewire (we called it "Active guidewire") Methods We compared 50 semirigid ureteroscopies (sURS) performed using the active guidewire with another 50 procedures conducted with a classic guidewire. We evaluated the difference in operating times, quality of endoscopic vision, periprocedural infections rate and stone-free rate.
RESULTS RESULTS
The use of active guidewire has considerably reduced the standardized operating times per unit stone-volume by about 39%. Vision quality has improved considerably thanks to the continuous flow in-and-out. Consequently, periprocedural infections decreased (3% vs 30%) and the stone-free rate rose from 86% to 92%.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Employing an "active guidewire" instead of the standard guidewire, the risk of complications related to high pressures and operating time is considerably lower, as well as better treatment quality thanks to the cleaner vision. This technique has proven to be safe as well as easy to apply, and in our belief is to be preferred whenever the ureter accepts without forcing, both the presence of the catheter and the semi-rigid 7 F ureteroscope.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34933539
doi: 10.4081/aiua.2021.4.431
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

431-435

Auteurs

Alessandro Calarco (A)

Department of Urology, "Cristo Re" Hospital Fondation, Rome. alecalarco@gmail.com.

Marco Frisenda (M)

Department of Urology, "Cristo Re" Hospital Fondation, Rome; Department of Urology, Policlinico Umberto I, "La Sapienza" University, Rome. marco.frisenda57hu@gmail.com.

Emilio Molinaro (E)

Department of Urology, "Cristo Re" Hospital Fondation, Rome; Department of Urology, Policlinico Umberto I, "La Sapienza" University, Rome. emilio.molinaro89@gmail.com.

Niccolò Lenci (N)

Department of Urology, "A. Gemelli" Academic Hospital, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome. lenci.niccolo@live.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH