ArticleWorld journal of urology2022
Comparison of intrarenal pressure between convention and vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath using an ex vivo porcine kidney model.
Article in World journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of suction technique and non-suction technique in retrograde intrarenal stone surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International urology and nephrology · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Parameter mapping for the use of flexible and navigable suction sheath: an in vitro study.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- The usage of ureteral catheter outside of the ureteral access sheath to facilitate stone passage through the UAS during RIRS: A case report.Urology case reports · 2026Article
- Handle with care: ureteral access sheath positioning modulates intrarenal pressure-insights from an EAU endourology ex vivo study using four ureteroscope sizes.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Intrarenal pressure variations during flexible ureteroscopy in a porcine kidney model: impact of ureteral access sheath types and irrigation methods.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Novel non-invasive intrarenal pressure monitoring devices in flexible ureteroscopy: an in-vitro comparative study.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Sand clearance vs. flowrate during ureteroscopy: studies in an in-vitro transparent kidney model.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Novel Flexible Ureteroscopic System for intrarenal pelvic and intracaliceal pressure measurement in porcine models.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Real time monitoring of intrarenal pressures while using the flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath.World journal of urology · 2025Observational
- Article
- Optimal deflection techniques for flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS): a comparative in vitro PEARLS analysis.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Scoping Review of Experimental and Clinical Evidence and Its Influence on Development of the Suction Ureteral Access Sheath.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Intrarenal pressure detection during flexible ureteroscopy with fiber optic pressure sensor system in porcine model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The optimal ratio of endoscope-sheath diameter with negative-pressure ureteral access sheath: an in vitro research.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Intrarenal pressure study using 7.5 French flexible ureteroscope with or without ureteral access sheath in an ex-vivo porcine kidney model.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- The effect of irrigation rate on intrarenal pressure in an ex vivo porcine kidney model-preliminary study with different flexible ureteroscopes and ureteral access sheaths.World journal of urology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to prove the vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath (vaUAS) is more effective in maintaining a lower IRP than conventional ureteral access sheath (cUAS). MATERIALS: The model consisted of 12 freshly harvested adult porcine kidneys.
methodsEither a 12/14F cUAS or vaUAS was alternately inserted into the ureter to one cm below the renal pelvis. Upper, middle, and lower calyces were punctured, and 6F pressure monitor catheters were introduced. IRP with cUAS was monitored using various irrigation rates. IRP with vaUAS was monitored with the same irrigation rates; various aspiration pressures; and vent fully closed, 50% closed, and fully open.
resultscUAS with irrigation rate of 50 cc/min resulted in IRP < 30 mmHg. 50 to 100 cc/min should be used with caution. When irrigation rate exceeded 100 cc/min, IRP rose to ≥ 30 mmHg in most instances. With vent closed, vaUAS with vacuum pressure ≥ 150 mmHg and irrigation rate of 50 cc, 100 cc, and 150 cc/min generally resulted in IRPs < 5 mmHg. With vent half closed, vaUAS with vacuum pressure ≥ 300 mmHg and irrigation rate of ≤ 100 cc/min avoided IRP > 30 mmHg. vaUAS with vent open showed limited advantages over cUAS.
conclusionvaUAS maintains lower IRP than cUAS under same parameters. Both vaUAS and cUAS can be used when irrigation is ≤ 50 cc/min vaUAS showed clear advantages over cUAS in maintaining lower pressure when irrigation rate is ≥ 100 cc/min.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.