Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: current knowledge and future perspectives

Over the last four decades, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) has been used as an effective technique to treat kidney and ureteral stones. Nowadays, ESWL still plays a role in stone treatment and is a primary treatment option in different guidelines. New technologies are now available to endourologists, but this procedure remains valid. This narrative review will shortly illustrate the history of ESWL and its clinical applications, limits, and specific uses.</p

Laparoscopic Pyelolithotomy for treating urolithiasis in ectopic pelvic kidneys

ABSTRACT Introduction: The management of urolithiasis ectopic pelvic kidneys (EPK) can be challenging because of the aberrant anatomy (1–4). We demonstrate the step-by-step technique of the laparoscopic approach for treating urolithiasis in EPK. Patients and methods: Three men with EPK (2 left, 1 right) underwent laparoscopic pyelolithotomy through a transperitoneal approach. After establishing the pneumoperitoneum, the parietal peritoneum was opened at the parietal colic sulcus and the bowel displaced medially. The kidney was identified in the retroperitoneum and the renal pelvis exposed after removal of the perirenal adipose tissue. The renal pelvis was opened, and the stones were identified and retrieved with forceps in 2 cases and with a flexible nephroscope in 1 case. The renal pelvis was closed with a 3/0 running barbed suture. A DJ stent was placed in all patients. Results: For the first time, a laparoscopic technique for treating stones in the ectopic kidney is demonstrated in detail. Mean patient age was 52.6 years (44-58). The mean stone size was 22.3 mm (20-24 mm). Stones were in the renal pelvis in 2 cases and in the inferior calyx in 1 case. Mean operative time was 146 minutes (135-155 min). Mean estimated blood loss was 116 ml (60-140 ml). No complications were observed. The mean hospital stay was 3 days. The DJ stents were removed after 3 weeks. All patients were stone free at the postoperative CT scan with a mean follow-up of 3.3 months (1-6 months). Conclusions: Laparoscopic pyelolithotomy can be an effective and reproducible minimally invasive technique for treating urolithiasis in EPK

Understanding the Role of Ureteral Access Sheath in Preventing Post-Operative Infectious Complications in Stone Patients Treated with Ureteroscopy and Ho:YAG Laser Lithotripsy: Results from a Tertiary Care Referral Center

Introduction and objectives: The use of ureteral access sheaths (UAS) limits the irrigation-induced increase in intrarenal pressure during ureteroscopy (URS). We investigated the relationship between UAS and rates of postoperative infectious complications in stone patients treated with URS. Materials and methods: Data from 369 stone patients treated with URS from September 2016 to December 2021 at a single institution were analyzed. UAS (10/12 Fr) placement was attempted in case of intrarenal surgery. The chi-square test was used to assess the relationship between the use of UAS and fever, sepsis, and septic shock. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses tested the association of patients’ characteristics and operative data and the rate of postoperative infectious complications. Results: Full data collection of 451 URS procedures was available. Overall, UAS was used in 220 (48.8%) procedures. As for postoperative infectious sequalae, we recorded fever (n = 52; 11.5%), sepsis (n = 10; 2.2%), and septic shock (n = 6; 1.3%). Of those, UAS was not used in 29 (55.8%), 7 (70%), and 5 (83.3%) cases, respectively (all p > 0.05). At multivariable logistic regression analysis, performing URS without UAS was not associated with the risk of having fever and sepsis, but it increased the risk of septic shock (OR = 14.6; 95% CI = 1.08–197.1). Moreover, age-adjusted CCI score (for fever-OR = 1.23; 95% CI = 1.07–1.42, sepsis-OR = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.09–1.99, and septic shock-OR = 1.61; 95% CI = 1.08–2.42, respectively), history of fever secondary to stones (for fever-OR = 2.23; 95% CI = 1.02–4.90) and preoperative positive urine culture (for sepsis-OR = 4.87; 95% CI = 1.12–21.25) did emerge as further associated risk factors. Conclusions: The use of UAS emerged to prevent the onset of septic shock in patients treated with URS, with no clear benefit in terms of fever and sepsis. Further studies may help clarify whether the reduction in fluid reabsorption load mediated by UAS is protective against life-threatening conditions in case of infectious complications. The patients’ baseline characteristics remain the main predictors of infectious sequelae in a clinical setting

What to expect from the novel pulsed thulium:YAG laser? A systematic review of endourological applications

INTRODUCTION Several preclinical studies about a novel pulsed-thulium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (p-Tm:YAG) device have been published, demonstrating its possible clinical relevance. METHODS We systematically reviewed the reality and expectations for this new p-Tm:YAG technology. A PubMed, Scopus and Embase search were performed. All relevant studies and data identified in the bibliographic search were selected, categorized, and summarized. RESULTS Tm:YAG is a solid state diode-pumped laser that emits at a wavelength of 2013 nm, in the infrared spectrum. Despite being close to the Ho:YAG emission wavelength (2120 nm), Tm:YAG is much closer to the water absorption peak and has higher absorption coefficient in liquid water. At present, there very few evaluations of the commercially available p-Tm:YAG devices. There is a lack of information on how the technical aspects, functionality and pulse mechanism can be maximized for clinical utility. Available preclinical studies suggest that p-Tm:YAG laser may potentially increase the ablated stone weight as compared to Ho:YAG under specific condition and similar laser parameters, showing lower retropulsion as well. Regarding laser safety, a preclinical study observed similar absolute temperature and cumulative equivalent minutes at 43° C as compared to Ho:YAG. Finally, laser-associated soft-tissue damage was assessed at histological level, showing similar extent of alterations due to coagulation and necrosis when compared with the other clinically relevant lasers. CONCLUSIONS The p-Tm:YAG appears to be a potential alternative to the Ho:YAG and TFL according to these preliminary laboratory data. Due to its novelty, further studies are needed to broaden our understanding of its functioning and clinical applicability

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the treatment of urolithiasis: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training-Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (T.R.U.S.T.)-Group

PURPOSE To identify laser lithotripsy settings used by experts for specific clinical scenarios and to identify preventive measures to reduce complications. METHODS After literature research to identify relevant questions, a survey was conducted and sent to laser experts. Participants were asked for preferred laser settings during specific clinical lithotripsy scenarios. Different settings were compared for the reported laser types, and common settings and preventive measures were identified. RESULTS Twenty-six laser experts fully returned the survey. Holmium-yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) was the primary laser used (88%), followed by thulium fiber laser (TFL) (42%) and pulsed thulium-yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Tm:YAG) (23%). For most scenarios, we could not identify relevant differences among laser settings. However, the laser power was significantly different for middle-ureteral (p = 0.027), pelvic (p = 0.047), and lower pole stone (p = 0.018) lithotripsy. Fragmentation or a combined fragmentation with dusting was more common for Ho:YAG and pulsed Tm:YAG lasers, whereas dusting or a combination of dusting and fragmentation was more common for TFL lasers. Experts prefer long pulse modes for Ho:YAG lasers to short pulse modes for TFL lasers. Thermal injury due to temperature development during lithotripsy is seriously considered by experts, with preventive measures applied routinely. CONCLUSIONS Laser settings do not vary significantly between commonly used lasers for lithotripsy. Lithotripsy techniques and settings mainly depend on the generated laser pulse's and generator settings' physical characteristics. Preventive measures such as maximum power limits, intermittent laser activation, and ureteral access sheaths are commonly used by experts to decrease thermal injury-caused complications

European association of urology section of urolithiasis and international alliance of urolithiasis joint consensus on retrograde intrarenal surgery for the management of renal stones

Background: Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) has become the preferred treatment modality for nephrolithiasis. However, because of ongoing uncertainties regarding the optimal perioperative management, operative technique, and postoperative follow-up, as well as a lack of standardization for outcome reporting, consensus is needed to achieve more uniform clinical practice worldwide. Objective: To develop recommendations for RIRS on the basis of existing data and expert consensus. Design, setting, and participants: A protocol-driven, three-phase study was conducted by the European Association of Urology Section of Urolithiasis (EULIS) and the International Alliance of Urolithiasis (IAU). The process included: (1) a nonsystematic review of the literature to define domains for discussion; (2) a two-round modified Delphi survey involving experts in this field; and (3) an additional group meeting and third-round survey involving 64 senior representative members to formulate the final conclusions. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The results from each previous round were returned to the participants for re-evaluation of their decisions during the next round. The agreement threshold was set at 70%. Results and limitations: The panel included 209 participants who developed 29 consensus statements on the following topics of interest: (1) perioperative infection management; (2) perioperative antithrombotic therapy; (3) fundamentals of the operative technique; and (4) standardized outcome reporting. Although this consensus can be considered as a useful reference for more clinically oriented daily practice, we also acknowledge that a higher level of evidence from further clinical trials is needed. Conclusions: The consensus statements aim to guide and standardize clinical practice and research on RIRS and to recommend standardized outcome reporting. Patient summary: An international consensus on the best practice for minimally invasive surgery for kidney stones was organized and developed by two international societies. It is anticipated that this consensus will provide further guidance to urologists and may help to improve clinical outcomes for patients