This article provides a step-by-step guide to flexible ureteroscopy (URS), with focus on some of the newer techniques and technologies available to facilitate treatment of complex stones. In it we review indications, preoperative evaluation, surgical steps, postoperative care, troubleshooting methods, and complication management. Furthermore, we will explore advances in laser technologies, the integration of suction mechanisms, and the incorporation of intrarenal pressure measurement systems in flexible URS.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AssimosD, KrambeckA, MillerNL, et al.Surgical management of stones: American urological association/Endourological society guideline, PART II. J Urol, 2016; 196(4):1161–1169; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.091
2.
AwedewAF, AlemuCT, YalewDZ. Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: A systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials. Urolithiasis, 2023; 51(1):87; doi: 10.1007/s00240-023-01459-x
3.
SharafA, AmerT, SomaniBK, et al.Ureteroscopy in patients with bleeding diatheses, anticoagulated, and on anti-platelet agents: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Endourol, 2017; 31(12):1217–1225; doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0253
4.
HyamsE, MarienT, BruhnA, et al.Ureteroscopy for transplant lithiasis. J Endourol, 2012; 26(7):819–822; doi: 10.1089/end.2011.0495
5.
GerberRC, BestSL, HedicanSP, et al.Flexible ureteroscopy as the new standard for the management of renal transplant urolithiasis <15 mm: A single-center experience. J Endourol/Endourolo Soc, 2021; 35(10):1443–1447; doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0473
6.
UgurluİM, AkmanT, BinbayM, et al.Outcomes of retrograde flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy for stone disease in patients with anomalous kidneys. Urolithiasis, 2015; 43(1):77–82; doi: 10.1007/s00240-014-0713-9
7.
ItoH, AboumarzoukOM, AbushammaF, et al.Systematic review of caliceal diverticulum. J Endourol/Endourolo Soc, 2018; 32(10):961–972; doi: 10.1089/end.2018.0332
8.
SeminsMJ, TrockBJ, MatlagaBR. The safety of ureteroscopy during pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol, 2009; 181(1):139–143; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.09.029
9.
LightnerDJ, WymerK, SanchezJ, et al.Best practice statement on urologic procedures and antimicrobial prophylaxis. J Urol, 2020; 203(2):351–356; doi: 10.1097/ju.0000000000000509
10.
TzelvesL, TürkC, SkolarikosA. European association of urology urolithiasis guidelines: Where are we going? Eur Urol Focus, 2021; 7(1):34–38; doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.09.011
11.
SchoenthalerM, BuchholzN, FarinE, et al.The Post-Ureteroscopic Lesion Scale (PULS): A multicenter video-based evaluation of inter-rater reliability. World J Urol, 2014; 32(4):1033–1040; doi: 10.1007/s00345-013-1185-1
12.
De ConinckV, KellerEX, SomaniB, et al.Complications of ureteroscopy: A complete overview. World J Urol, 2020; 38(9):2147–2166; doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-03012-1
13.
el-NahasAR. Retrograde endopyelotomy: A comparison between laser and Acucise balloon cutting catheter. Curr Urol Rep, 2007; 8(2):122–127; doi: 10.1007/s11934-007-0061-1
14.
WalzJ, LecamusC, LechevallierE, et al.Complications of “Acucise” balloon endopyelotomy. Prog Urol, 2003; 13(1):39–45.
15.
TraxerO, Wendt-NordahlG, SodhaH, et al.Differences in renal stone treatment and outcomes for patients treated either with or without the support of a ureteral access sheath: The clinical research office of the Endourological society ureteroscopy global study. World J Urol, 2015; 33(12):2137–2144; doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1582-8
16.
BloomJ, FoxC, FullertonS, et al.Sepsis after elective ureteroscopy. Can J Urol, 2017; 24(5):9017–9023.
17.
NevoA, ManoR, BanielJ, et al.Ureteric stent dwelling time: A risk factor for post-ureteroscopy sepsis. BJU International, 2017; 120(1):117–122; doi: 10.1111/bju.13796
18.
MitsuzukaK, NakanoO, TakahashiN, et al.Identification of factors associated with postoperative febrile urinary tract infection after ureteroscopy for urinary stones. Urolithiasis, 2016; 44(3):257–262; doi: 10.1007/s00240-015-0816-y
19.
NevoA, ManoR, SchreterE, et al.Clinical implications of stent culture in patients with indwelling ureteral stents prior to ureteroscopy. J Urol, 2017; 198(1):116–121; doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.01.064
20.
QianX, LiuC, HongS, et al.Application of suctioning ureteral access sheath during flexible ureteroscopy for renal stones decreases the risk of postoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Int J Clin Pract, 2022; 2022:9354714; doi: 10.1155/2022/9354714
21.
ErkocM, BozkurtM, SezginMA, et al.Efficacy of aspiration-assisted ureteral access sheath (ClearPETRA) in retrograde intrarenal surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A, 2024; 34(5):420–424; doi: 10.1089/lap.2024.0076
22.
JohnsonDE, CromeensDM, PriceRE. Use of the holmium:YAG laser in urology. Lasers Surg Med, 1992; 12(4):353–363; doi: 10.1002/lsm.1900120402
23.
KronenbergP, TraxerO. The laser of the future: Reality and expectations about the new thulium fiber laser-a systematic review. Translational Andrology and Urology, 2019; 8(Suppl 4):S398–S417; doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.08.01
24.
KronenbergP, TraxerO. Update on lasers in urology 2014: Current assessment on holmium: Yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser lithotripter settings and laser fibers. World J Urol, 2015; 33(4):463–469; doi: 10.1007/s00345-014-1395-1
25.
KronenbergP, SomaniB. Advances in lasers for the treatment of stones-a systematic review. Curr Urol Rep, 2018; 19(6):45; doi: 10.1007/s11934-018-0807-y
MatlagaBR, ChewB, EisnerB, et al.Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy: A review of dusting vs fragmentation with extraction. J Endourol, 2018; 32(1):1–6; doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0641
28.
SrokaR, PongratzT, ScheibG, et al.Impact of pulse duration on Ho: YAG laser lithotripsy: Treatment aspects on the single-pulse level. World J Urol, 2015; 33(4):479–485; doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1504-9
29.
RiverosCA, ChalfantV, MelchartT, et al.Does Moses technology improve the efficiency and outcomes of standard holmium laser lithotripsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cent European J Urol, 2022; 75(4):409–417; doi: 10.5173/ceju.2022.156
30.
TraxerO, KellerEX. Thulium fiber laser: The new player for kidney stone treatment? A comparison with Holmium: YAG laser. World J Urol, 2020; 38(8):1883–1894; doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02654-5
31.
YaroslavskyI, VinnichenkoV, McNeillT, et al.Optimization of a novel Tm fiber laser lithotripter in terms of stone ablation efficiency and retropulsion reduction. SPIE, 2018.
32.
ChewBH, KooKC, HalawaniA, et al.Comparing dusting and fragmenting efficiency using the new SuperPulsed thulium fiber laser versus a 120 W Holmium: YAG laser. Investig Clin Urol, 2023; 64(3):265–271; doi: 10.4111/icu.20230071
33.
UleriA, FarréA, IzquierdoP, et al.Thulium fiber laser versus holmium: Yttrium Aluminum garnet for lithotripsy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol, 2024; 85(6):529–540; doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.01.011
34.
ChicaudM, CorralesM, KutchukianS, et al.Thulium: YAG laser: A good compromise between holmium: YAG and thulium fiber laser for endoscopic lithotripsy? A narrative review. World J Urol, 2023; 41(12):3437–3447; doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04679-3
35.
PetzoldR, Suarez-IbarrolaR, MiernikA. Temperature assessment of a novel pulsed thulium solid-state laser compared with a holmium: Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet laser. J Endourol, 2021; 35(6):853–859; doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0803
36.
PanthierF, SolanoC, ChicaudM, et al.Initial clinical experience with the pulsed solid-state thulium YAG laser from Dornier during RIRS: First 25 cases. World J Urol, 2023; 41(8):2119–2125; doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04501-0
37.
SternKL, BorgertBJ, WolfJSJr, Steerable Ureteroscopic Renal Evacuation (SURE) for large renal stones: A multi-institutional center study. J Endourol, 2023; 37(11):1179–1183; doi: 10.1089/end.2023.0424
38.
MatlagaB, MuellerT, JohnsonB, et al.PD10-04 prospective, randomized study of steerable ureteroscopic renal evacuation vs ureteroscopy with basketing: 30-day results of the aspire study. J Urolo, 2024; 211(5S):e186.
BhojaniN, KooKC, BensaadiK, et al.Retrospective first-in-human use of the LithoVue™ Elite ureteroscope to measure intrarenal pressure. BJU Int, 2023; 132(6):678–685; doi: 10.1111/bju.16173
41.
ChartierA, NahhasN, ChadhaP, et al.MP04-02 ureteroscopic techniques and anatomic sites associated with periods of elevated intrarenal pressure. J Urology, 2024; 211(5S):e32.
