Fulltext

RIRS with disposable or reusable scopes: does it make a difference? Results from the multicenter FLEXOR study

Gauhar V 1 , Chai CA 2 , Chew BH 3 , Singh A 4 , Castellani D 5 , Tailly T 6 Show all authors , Emiliani E 7 , Keat WOL 8 , Ragoori D 9 , Lakmichi MA 10 , Teoh JY 11 , Traxer O 12 , Somani BK 13

Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore
  • 2 Urology Unit, Department of Surgery, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 3 Department of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
  • 4 Muljibhai Patel Urological Hospital, Nadiad, India
  • 5 Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
  • 6 Department of Urology, University Hospital of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
  • 7 Urology Department, Fundación Puigvert, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
  • 8 Department of Urology, Penang General Hospital, Penang, Malaysia
  • 9 Asian Institute of Nephrourology, Hyderabad, India
  • 10 Department of Urology, University Hospital Mohammed the VIth of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco
  • 11 S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong
  • 12 Department of Urology, AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, Paris, France
  • 13 Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK
Ther Adv Urol, 2023;15:17562872231158072.
PMID: 36923302 DOI: 10.1177/17562872231158072

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: With several single-use ureteroscopes now available, our aim was to analyze and compare data obtained globally from high-volume centers using both disposable and reusable flexible ureteroscopes and see if indeed in real-world practice either scope has a distinct advantage.

METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on the FLEXOR registry, which was created as a TOWER group (Team of Worldwide Endourological Researchers, research wing of the Endourological Society) endeavor. Patients who underwent retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones from January 2018 to August 2021 were enrolled from 20 centers globally. A total of 6663 patients whose data were available for analysis were divided into Group 1 (Reusable scopes, 4808 patients) versus Group 2 (Disposable scopes, 1855 patients).

RESULTS: The age and gender distribution were similar in both groups. The mean stone size was 11.8 mm and 9.6 mm in Groups 2 and 1, respectively (p 2 cm stones, lower pole stones and of higher Hounsfield unit. Thulium fiber laser (TFL) was used more in Group 2 (p 

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

Similar publications