» Articles » PMID: 38758400

Fluid Absorption During Flexible Ureteroscopy with Intelligent Control of Renal Pelvic Pressure: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview
Journal World J Urol
Specialty Urology
Date 2024 May 17
PMID 38758400
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: To investigate fluid absorption and its influencing factors during flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure (RPP).

Methods: A total of 80 patients with upper urinary tract calculi underwent flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of RPP by pressure-measuring ureteral access sheath and were randomly divided into four groups. The RPP of Groups A, B, and C were set at - 5, 0 and 5 mmHg, respectively. Conventional flexible ureteroscopy with uncontrolled pressure served as control Group D. The perfusion flow rate was set at 100 ml/min in the four groups, with 20 patients in each group. The fluid absorption was measured by 1% ethanol every 10 min. Operation time, stone-free rate, and complications were recorded.

Result: Seventy-three patients were finally included in the RCT. The general and preoperative data of the patients were comparable between the groups. The fluid absorption of Groups A, B, and C was significantly less than that of Group D (P < 0.01). Fluid absorption and operation time were positively correlated, and the correlation coefficients R were 0.864, 0.896, 0.918, and 0.947, respectively (P < 0.01). The fluid absorption of patients with vomiting, fever and ureteral injury was greater than that of patients without complications in the four groups (P < 0.01). In different groups, fluid absorption was greater in patients with ureteral injury Post-Ureteroscopic Lesion Scale (PULS) 1-3 than in noninjured patients (P < 0.01).

Conclusion: Flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of RPP effectively reduces the absorption of perfusion fluid. Operation time and ureteral injury are also key factors affecting perfusion fluid absorption.

Registration Number And Date: NCT05201599; August 11, 2021.

References
1.
Guzelburc V, Balasar M, Colakogullari M, Guven S, Kandemir A, Ozturk A . Comparison of absorbed irrigation fluid volumes during retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of kidney stones larger than 2 cm. Springerplus. 2016; 5(1):1707. PMC: 5050171. DOI: 10.1186/s40064-016-3383-y. View

2.
Alsyouf M, Abourbih S, West B, Hodgson H, Baldwin D . Elevated Renal Pelvic Pressures during Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Risk Higher Postoperative Pain and Longer Hospital Stay. J Urol. 2017; 199(1):193-199. DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.08.039. View

3.
Zaragoza M, Moorman M, Chew L . Ultra Long-term Follow-up of the Autologous Pubovaginal Sling for Stress Incontinence: Results at 23 Years. Urology. 2023; 185:44-48. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.12.001. View

4.
Croghan S, Skolarikos A, Jack G, Manecksha R, Walsh M, OBrien F . Upper urinary tract pressures in endourology: a systematic review of range, variables and implications. BJU Int. 2022; 131(3):267-279. DOI: 10.1111/bju.15764. View

5.
Deng X, Song L, Xie D, Fan D, Zhu L, Yao L . A Novel Flexible Ureteroscopy with Intelligent Control of Renal Pelvic Pressure: An Initial Experience of 93 Cases. J Endourol. 2016; 30(10):1067-1072. DOI: 10.1089/end.2015.0770. View