ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Optimizing Outcomes in Flexible Ureteroscopy: A Narrative Review of Suction Techniques.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Stone dust in endourology: a systematic review of its definition, management, and clinical impact.BJU international · 2025Pooled it
- Enhanced stone-free rates with suctioning ureteral access sheath vs. traditional sheath in retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC urology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of suction and standard ureteral access sheath versus sheathless flexible ureteroscopy in management of upper ureteral and renal calculi.BMC urology · 2026Trial
- Direct in-scope suction (DISS) ureteroscopy: techniques, outcomes and future directions.BJU international · 2026Review
- An in vitro study evaluating the internal pressure during RIRS of suction ureteral access sheath versus traditional sheath.Arab journal of urology · 2026Article
- Research progress on treating urinary system stones using ureteroscopy combined With a negative-pressure suction sheath.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- Impact of flow rate and ratio of endoscope-sheath diameter on stone removal in flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: in vitro and CFD analyses insights.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Quartz sand as a phantom for urinary stone dust.BJU international · 2025Article
- Size matters: an in vitro evaluation of flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheaths.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Article
- Is the ablation stone efficacy and efficiency better with a flexible and navigable suction ureteric access sheath?World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Relocation of big stone fragments with direct-in scope suction.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Analysis of the effectiveness and safety of 7.5 Fr ultra-thin flexible ureteroscope combined with a tip-flexible suctioning ureteral access sheath for the treatment of kidney stones.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Stone fragmentation with subsequent evacuation using a novel single-use flexible cystoscope/nephroscope with integrated direct in-scope suction: AnCentral European journal of urology · 2025Article
- Rise in intraluminal temperature during ureteroscopy: Is this a concern?Investigative and clinical urology · 2025Review
- Efficacy and safety of two tip flexible suctioning ureteral access sheaths combined with a 7.5Fr flexible ureteroscope: a retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Small Diameter (7.5 Fr) Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscopy with Direct In-Scope Suction (DISSJournal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Pressure reduction and suction characteristics of the new digital single use flexible ureteroscope with suction: an in-vitro experimental study.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- First clinical evaluation of a flexible digital ureteroscope with direct in scope suctioning system (Pusen DISS 7.5Ch): prospective multicentric feasibility study.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Direct in-scope suction: an in vitro evaluation of a single use flexible ureteroscope with integrated suction capability.World journal of urology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this review is to summarize the existing suction systems in flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) and to evaluate their effectiveness and safety.
methodsA narrative review was performed using the Pubmed and Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) databases. Additionally, we conducted a search on the Twitter platform. Studies including suctions systems in fURS were included. Editorials, letters and studies reporting intervention with semirigid ureteroscopy, PCNL and mPCNL were excluded.
resultsA total of 12 studies were included in this review. These studies comprised one in vitro study, one ex vivo study, one experimental study and eight cohort studies. The Pubmed and WoSCC searches identified three suction techniques (Irrigation/Suctioning system with control of pressure, suction ureteral access sheath (sUAS) and direct in scope suction (DISS)), and the Twitter search identified four of them. The overall results showed that suction is an effective and safe technique that improves stone-free rates, reduces operative time and limits complication rates after fURS.
conclusionsThe use of suctioning during common endourological procedures has been shown to improve safety and efficacy in several indications. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this.
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.