Ureteral access sheath provides protection against elevated renal pressures during routine flexible ureteroscopic stone manipulation.

  • Auge B
  • Pietrow P
  • Lallas C
 et al. 
  • 18

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 149

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: New-generation flexible ureteroscopes allow the management of proximal ureteral and intrarenal pathology with high success rates, including complete removal of ureteral and renal calculi. One problem is that the irrigation pressures generated within the collecting system can be significantly elevated, as evidenced by pyelovenous and pyelolymphatic backflow seen during retrograde pyelography. We sought to determine if the ureteral access sheath (UAS) can offer protection from high intrarenal pressures attained during routine ureteroscopic stone surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five patients (average age 72.6 years) evaluated in the emergency department for obstructing calculi underwent percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) tube placement to decompress their collecting systems. The indications for PCN tube placement were obstructive renal failure (N=1), urosepsis (N=2), and obstruction with uncontrolled pain and elevated white blood cell counts (N=2). Flexible ureteroscopy was subsequently performed with and without the aid of the UAS while pressures were measured via the nephrostomy tube connected to a pressure transducer. Pressures were recorded at baseline and in the distal, mid, and proximal ureter and renal pelvis, first without the UAS, and then with the UAS in place. RESULTS: The average baseline pressure within the collecting system was 13.6 mm Hg. The mean intrarenal pressure with the ureteroscope in the distal ureter without the UAS was 60 mm Hg and with the UAS was 15 mm Hg. With the ureteroscope in the midureter, the pressures were 65.6 and 17.5 mm Hg, respectively; with the ureteroscope in the proximal ureter 79.2 and 24 mm Hg, and with the ureteroscope in the renal pelvis 94.4 and 40.6 mm Hg, respectively. All differences at each location were statistically significant (P

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

  • Brian K Auge

  • Paul K Pietrow

  • Costas D Lallas

  • Ganesh V Raj

  • Robert W Santa-Cruz

  • Glenn M Preminger

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free