ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
RIRS with disposable or reusable scopes: does it make a difference? Results from the multicenter FLEXOR study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimodal comparison of 19 single-use flexible ureteroscopes: bench testing, operative video assessment, and surgeon ratings.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- To compare the efficacy and safety between balloon dilation and robot-assisted laparoscopic ureter reconstruction in treating short (≤ 2 cm) ureter stricture following holmium laser: a single-center retrospective study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Two cost-effective techniques for intrarenal pressure monitoring during flexible ureteroscopy: validation of a handheld pressure meter against a sphygmomanometer in a bench-top model.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Iatrogenic upper urinary tract injuries during ureteroscopy for urolithiasis: a comprehensive review on incidence, mechanisms and preventative strategies.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025Review
- Single-use versus reusable flexible ureterorenoscopes with FANS: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis of outcomes in a large series from the EAU-Endourology Section and FANS Collaborative Group.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Flexible ureteroscopy for lower pole calculus: is it still a challenge?World journal of urology · 2023Review
- Is there a "Best ureteroscope" for flexible ureteroscopy with FANS: an EAU-endourology perspective.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
- The reused-disposable scope in flexible ureteroscopy for stones as a cost-conscious approach: Reporting the outcomes of a real-world practice multicenter study of 2183 patients by the team of worldwide endourological researchers group.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
- Does unenhanced computerized tomography as imaging standard post-retrograde intrarenal surgery paradoxically reduce stone-free rate and increase additional treatment for residual fragments? Outcomes from 5395 patients in the FLEXOR study by the TOWER group.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 12 institutions in 11 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: With several single-use ureteroscopes now available, our aim was to analyze and compare data obtained globally from high-volume centers using both disposable and reusable flexible ureteroscopes and see if indeed in real-world practice either scope has a distinct advantage. Methods: Retrospective analysis was performed on the FLEXOR registry, which was created as a TOWER group (Team of Worldwide Endourological Researchers, research wing of the Endourological Society) endeavor. Patients who underwent retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones from January 2018 to August 2021 were enrolled from 20 centers globally. A total of 6663 patients whose data were available for analysis were divided into Group 1 (Reusable scopes, 4808 patients) Results: The age and gender distribution were similar in both groups. The mean stone size was 11.8 mm and 9.6 mm in Groups 2 and 1, respectively ( Conclusion: Our real-world practice observations suggest that urologists choose disposable scopes for bigger, lower pole, and harder stones, and it does indeed help in improving the single-stage SFR if used correctly, with the appropriate lasers and lasing techniques in expert hands.
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.