ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Intrarenal pressure and stone fragment retrieval efficiency using foot-controlled irrigation in combination with a flexible, navigable Suction ureteral access sheath: an in vitro kidney model study.
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Effects of a head-up position on stone retrieval efficiency and intrarenal pressure using a flexible navigable suction access sheath: an in vitro study.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath combined with flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy versus flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy alone for infected upper urinary tract stones: a retrospective cohort study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the safety and efficiency of stone fragment retrieval using a flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) combined with a foot-controlled irrigation device, focusing on intrarenal pressure (IRP) and stone retrieval time in a kidney phantom model.
methodsPhantom kidney models created from self‑healing supramolecular hydrogel were used to simulate the anatomy of the renal pelvis and calyces. Artificial stones were placed in the renal pelvis. Two groups were compared: Group A (control), which used continuous gravity irrigation with the FANS, and Group B (intervention), which used the same setup with additional intermittent flushing via a foot-controlled irrigation device. Outcomes included mean and peak IRP, as well as stone retrieval time.
resultsA total of 44 trials (22 paired comparisons) were conducted using the phantom kidney model. The overall mean IRP was - 3.43 mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.04--1.81) in Group A and - 2.24 mmHg (95% CI: -3.64--0.83) in Group B. The mean peak IRP was 6.39 mmHg (95% CI: 4.68-8.10) in Group A and 7.50 mmHg (95% CI: 5.58-9.42) in Group B. No significant differences were observed between the groups for mean IRP (p = 0.30) or peak IRP (p = 0.25). However, Group B demonstrated significantly shorter stone retrieval times compared to Group A (311.73 vs. 235.68 s, p < 0.01).
conclusionThe combination of FANS with a foot-controlled irrigation device facilitated efficient and safe stone retrieval without increasing IRP, potentially improving procedural performance during retrograde intrarenal surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41296046What 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.