ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023
Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscopes: How Difficult Is It Today to Stay Up to Date? A Pictorial Review of Instruments Available in Europe in 2023.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feasibility and safety of 6.3 Fr vs. 7.5 Fr digital disposable ureteroscopes in retrograde intrarenal surgery: a prospective randomised trial.World journal of urology · 2025Trial
- Multimodal comparison of 19 single-use flexible ureteroscopes: bench testing, operative video assessment, and surgeon ratings.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Article
- [Critical assessment of single-use endoscopes].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Early clinical outcomes using a 6.3 Fr single use ureteroscope compared to a 7.5 Fr device.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Optimal deflection techniques for flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS): a comparative in vitro PEARLS analysis.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- The efficacy and safety of three different single-use ureteroscopes in retrograde intrarenal surgery: a comparative analysis of a single surgeon's experience in a single center.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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The invention of the flexible ureteroscope (fURS) and its subsequent spread have revolutionized the surgical management of urolithiasis and upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). During the last few years, single-use flexible ureteroscopes (su-fURSs) have been developed to improve the limitations of reusable fURSs, namely their cost, durability and risk of device contamination. Since the introduction of the first fully disposable digital fURS, several su-fURSs have been developed by various manufacturers. In this pictorial review, we combined the different physical and technical features of su-fURSs currently available on the market with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Conformity (CE) approval, in order to help surgeons choose the appropriate device according to each case requirement and personal preferences. To the best of our knowledge, 17 su-fURSs with CE and FDA approval have been developed to date.
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.