Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review
ABSTRACT Purpose: Ureteral access sheaths (UAS) are widely used in ureteroscopy. UAS are believed to pose a significant risk for ureteral stenosis due to ureteral mucosal compression, but little evidence supports this claim. Our systematic review aimed to investigate the relationship between differ...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia
2023-10-01
|
| Series: | Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502023000100501&lng=en&tlng=en |
| _version_ | 1797644471583637504 |
|---|---|
| author | Tamires Battistini Pissaia Mikhael Belkovsky Carlo Camargo Passerotti Everton Luiz de Almeida Artifon Jose Pinhata Otoch José Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz |
| author_facet | Tamires Battistini Pissaia Mikhael Belkovsky Carlo Camargo Passerotti Everton Luiz de Almeida Artifon Jose Pinhata Otoch José Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz |
| author_sort | Tamires Battistini Pissaia |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | ABSTRACT Purpose: Ureteral access sheaths (UAS) are widely used in ureteroscopy. UAS are believed to pose a significant risk for ureteral stenosis due to ureteral mucosal compression, but little evidence supports this claim. Our systematic review aimed to investigate the relationship between different UAS diameters and stenosis risk. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane, from its inception to May 2023. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines were followed. χ2 test was performed to compare the prevalence within the groups. Results: Six nonrandomized trials and one randomized, with a total of 962 patients, were included. The overall incidence of ureteral stenosis of 0.9%. UAS sizes were: 9.5/11.5Fr, 10/12Fr, 11/13Fr, 12/14Fr, and 14/16Fr. Within each subgroup, the incidence of ureteral stenosis was: 0.4, 8, 0, 1, and 1% (p = 0.099). No trend for stenosis was observed among larger UAS. Conclusions: In this systematic review, no relationship between UAS diameter and incidence of ureteral stenosis was observed. Nonetheless, additional randomized controlled trials are required to support this finding. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T14:30:55Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-34470d3ab50a43b7a2d861e400b583d2 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1678-2674 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T14:30:55Z |
| publishDate | 2023-10-01 |
| publisher | Sociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em Cirurgia |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira |
| spelling | doaj.art-34470d3ab50a43b7a2d861e400b583d22023-10-31T07:53:58ZengSociedade Brasileira para o Desenvolvimento da Pesquisa em CirurgiaActa Cirúrgica Brasileira1678-26742023-10-013810.1590/acb387423Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic reviewTamires Battistini Pissaiahttps://orcid.org/0009-0009-9289-1835Mikhael Belkovskyhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6599-7548Carlo Camargo Passerottihttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3023-6797Everton Luiz de Almeida Artifonhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1900-8777Jose Pinhata Otochhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-8293-1508José Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruzhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-4203-3196ABSTRACT Purpose: Ureteral access sheaths (UAS) are widely used in ureteroscopy. UAS are believed to pose a significant risk for ureteral stenosis due to ureteral mucosal compression, but little evidence supports this claim. Our systematic review aimed to investigate the relationship between different UAS diameters and stenosis risk. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane, from its inception to May 2023. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines were followed. χ2 test was performed to compare the prevalence within the groups. Results: Six nonrandomized trials and one randomized, with a total of 962 patients, were included. The overall incidence of ureteral stenosis of 0.9%. UAS sizes were: 9.5/11.5Fr, 10/12Fr, 11/13Fr, 12/14Fr, and 14/16Fr. Within each subgroup, the incidence of ureteral stenosis was: 0.4, 8, 0, 1, and 1% (p = 0.099). No trend for stenosis was observed among larger UAS. Conclusions: In this systematic review, no relationship between UAS diameter and incidence of ureteral stenosis was observed. Nonetheless, additional randomized controlled trials are required to support this finding.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502023000100501&lng=en&tlng=enConstrictionUreteral CalculiUreteroscopy |
| spellingShingle | Tamires Battistini Pissaia Mikhael Belkovsky Carlo Camargo Passerotti Everton Luiz de Almeida Artifon Jose Pinhata Otoch José Arnaldo Shiomi da Cruz Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review Acta Cirúrgica Brasileira Constriction Ureteral Calculi Ureteroscopy |
| title | Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review |
| title_full | Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review |
| title_fullStr | Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review |
| title_short | Diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development: a systematic review |
| title_sort | diameter of ureteral access sheath and ureteral stenosis development a systematic review |
| topic | Constriction Ureteral Calculi Ureteroscopy |
| url | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-86502023000100501&lng=en&tlng=en |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tamiresbattistinipissaia diameterofureteralaccesssheathandureteralstenosisdevelopmentasystematicreview AT mikhaelbelkovsky diameterofureteralaccesssheathandureteralstenosisdevelopmentasystematicreview AT carlocamargopasserotti diameterofureteralaccesssheathandureteralstenosisdevelopmentasystematicreview AT evertonluizdealmeidaartifon diameterofureteralaccesssheathandureteralstenosisdevelopmentasystematicreview AT josepinhataotoch diameterofureteralaccesssheathandureteralstenosisdevelopmentasystematicreview AT josearnaldoshiomidacruz diameterofureteralaccesssheathandureteralstenosisdevelopmentasystematicreview |