Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39896048›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology

Current utility, instruments, and future directions for intra-renal pressure management during ureteroscopy: scoping review by global research in intra-renal pressure collaborative group initiative.

Steffi Kar Kei Yuen, Wen Zhong, Yun Sang Chan, Daniele Castellani, Naeem Bhojani, Madhu Sudan Agarwal, Theodoros Tokas, Stefanie Croghan, Helene Jung, Thomas Herrmann and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05297331 (A Prospective Assessment of the Perioperative Parameter and Treatment Outcomes of Urinary Calculi - International Registry), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT05297331 recruitingnot on this map

A Prospective Assessment of the Perioperative Parameter and Treatment Outcomes of Urinary Calculi - International Registry

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2022 to 2033Enrolled3,000ConditionsUrolithiasis
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Healthcare resource utilization comparing single-use ureteroscopes with real-time intrarenal pressure monitoring to other single-use ureteroscopes.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Steffi Kar Kei YuenSH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9956-1558
Wen ZhongDepartment of Urology, Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Yun Sang ChanDepartment of Surgery, Tuen Mun Hospital, Tuen Mun, Hong Kong, China.
Daniele CastellaniUrology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7354-9190
Naeem BhojaniDivision of Urology, University of Montreal Hospital Center, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Madhu Sudan AgarwalDepartment of Urology, Rainbow Hospital, S.N. Medical College, Agra, UP, India.
Theodoros TokasDepartment of Urology, University General Hospital of Heraklion, University of Crete, Medical School, Heraklion, Greece.
Stefanie CroghanDepartment of Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Helene JungUrological Research Center, Department of Urology, Vejle Hospital (a part of Lillebaelt Hospital), University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark.
Thomas HerrmannDepartment of Urology, Kantonspital Frauenfeld, Spital Thurgau AG, Frauenfeld, Switzerland.
Bhaskar SomaniDepartment of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6248-6478
Vineet GauharDepartment of Urology, Ng Teng Fong Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3740-7141
Global Research on Intra-renal Pressure Collaborative Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Technical advancements and intrarenal pressure are synergistic in improving perioperative outcomes during flexible ureteroscopy (FURS). Mismanaged intra-renal pressure (IRP) has negative consequences and it is associated with an increased risk of sepsis, bleeding, pelvicalyceal fluid extravasation, and even collecting system injuries and acute as well as chronic renal failure. The cornerstone of a safe FURS is the ability to continuously monitor IRP to avoid elevation of IRP above the normal range of 10 mmHg. Objectives: This scoping review aims to report the current state of real-time IRP monitoring in in vivo clinical studies and the various monitoring methods and technology to understand how this may be best used in daily clinical practice. Eligibility criteria: A systematic literature search was conducted. Only in vivo clinical studies published in English documenting IRP measurement methodologies during semirigid or flexible ureteroscopy for urolithiasis management were included. Results: Out of 1326 retrieved papers, 17 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 2 randomized controlled trials, 2 retrospective studies, and 13 observational studies. Current noninvasive IRP monitoring devices include ureteric catheters placed retrogradely or via percutaneous tubing and connected to pressure transducers, amplified by cardiology-used pressure sensing systems or urodynamic systems, automated pressure-regulating systems, pressure sensing guidewires, and IRP sensing flexible ureteroscopes. The review revealed significant variations in IRP measurement methods, reporting units, and irrigation techniques. Notably, elevated IRP above 30 mmHg was consistently associated with increased postoperative complications, including sepsis. Conclusion: Current clinical studies have only ascertained that increased IRP above 40 mmHg positively correlates with infectious complications and postoperative pain. No standardized values are available to predefine safe thresholds in practice. With the availability of noninvasive tools for IRP monitoring, future research should focus on multicenter studies to establish reference ranges and best practices for IRP management, ultimately improving patient outcomes in endourological procedures.

Indexed as

flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheathintelligent integrated irrigation suction systemintrarenal pressureirrigation suction ratiolithotripsyureteroscopyurolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID39896048
PMCPMC11786285

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.