Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39026102›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2024

Intrarenal pressure and flow rate profile using LithoVue™ elite: impact of different irrigation systems and working channel instruments.

Lucas B Vergamini, Wilson R Molina, Willian Ito, Aaron Tverye, Quinnlyn Walcott, Holly E Du, Mihaela E Sardiu, Crystal Valadon, Daniel R Hanna, Donald Neff and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Lucas B VergaminiDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2046-9848
Wilson R MolinaDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Willian ItoDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA.
Aaron TveryeDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Quinnlyn WalcottSchool of Medicine, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Holly E DuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Mihaela E SardiuDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Crystal ValadonDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Daniel R HannaDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Donald NeffDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
David A DucheneDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA.
Bristol B WhilesDepartment of Urology, The University of Kansas Health System, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Mail Stop #3016, Kansas City, KS, 66160, USA. bwhiles@kumc.edu.

Funding

Boston Scientific Corporation ISRURO #0103
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo report real-time IRP and FR while performing flexible ureteroscopy in porcine kidney model utilizing LithoVue™ Elite (Boston Scientific®) with different irrigation systems, including automated pumps.

methodsUsing an ex-vivo model of porcine kidney, IRPs were measured with LithoVue Elite. Ureteroscopic settings (US) were tested with all permutations of irrigation methods (IM), working channel occupant (WCO), and ureteral access sheaths (UAS). IMs included: Single Action Pumping System (SAPS™, Boston Scientific), Thermedx FluidSmart™ (Stryker®), and ENDOMAT™ (Karl Storz®). Pumps were tested at 50, 100, and 150 mmHg. WCOs included a 1.9Fr zero-tip basket, 200 µm, and 365 µm laser fibers. UASs utilized 11/13Fr and 12/14Fr 36 cm.

results84 different US were tested (252 experiments). ENDOMAT had higher IRP but the same FR as Thermedx at the same US for 50 and 100 mmHg (p < 0.01). SAPS had higher IRP and FR than pumps in all US studies (p < 0.01). There was positive correlation between pressure set by the pump and both IRP and FR (rho > 0.9). As the diameter of the WCO increased, lower IRP and FR were observed with the pumps (p < 0.01). With SAPS, IRP was similar regardless of WCO, but FR was decreased with the increased diameter of WCO (p = 0.81 and p < 0.01, respectively). There was significantly higher IRP when using 11/13Fr UAS than 12/14Fr (p < 0.01).

conclusionIRP was higher with SAPS than automated pumps. ENDOMAT showed higher IRP than Thermedx when under 150 mmHg. IRP and FR increase with higher pump pressure and decrease with larger diameter WCO. Likewise, a larger UAS significantly reduced IRP.

Indexed as

KidneyPressureTherapeutic IrrigationUreteroscopyAnimalsEquipment DesignSwineUreteroscopesAutomated pumpsDigital ureteroscopeIntrarenal pressureLithoVue eliteUrolithiasis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.