Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41322450›Full record

ArticleCentral European journal of urology2025

Measurement and comparison of intrarenal pressures during retrograde intrarenal surgery using novel flexible ureteroscopes with integrated direct in-scope suction: An experimental

Arman Tsaturyan, Begoña Ballesta Martinez, Laurian Dragos, Hakob Sargsyan, Arthur Grabsky, Armen Muradyan, Sergey Fanarjyan, Artak Madatyan, Eugenio Ventimiglia, Angelis Peteinaris and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Central European journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

17 authors.

Arman Tsaturyan *Department of Urology, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia.
Begoña Ballesta Martinez *Department of Urology, University Hospital del Vinalopo, Alicante, Spain.
Laurian DragosDepartment of Urology, University of Cambridge NHS Trust, United Kingdom.
Hakob SargsyanDepartment of Urology, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia.
Arthur GrabskyDepartment of Urology, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia.
Armen MuradyanDepartment of Urology, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia.
Sergey FanarjyanDepartment of Urology, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia.
Artak MadatyanDepartment of Urology, Yerevan State Medical University, Yerevan, Armenia.
Eugenio VentimigliaEAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Angelis PeteinarisDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Greece.
Evangelos LiatsikosAdvancing Suction and Pressure and Innovative Research in Endourology (ASPIRE), Yerevan, Armenia.
Panagiotis Kallidonis *Advancing Suction and Pressure and Innovative Research in Endourology (ASPIRE), Yerevan, Armenia.
Steffi Kar Kei YuenAdvancing Suction and Pressure and Innovative Research in Endourology (ASPIRE), Yerevan, Armenia.
Vineet GauharAdvancing Suction and Pressure and Innovative Research in Endourology (ASPIRE), Yerevan, Armenia.
Olivier TraxerAdvancing Suction and Pressure and Innovative Research in Endourology (ASPIRE), Yerevan, Armenia.
Bhaskar SomaniAdvancing Suction and Pressure and Innovative Research in Endourology (ASPIRE), Yerevan, Armenia.
Amelia PietropaoloEAU Young Academic Urologists (YAU) Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group Arnhem, Arnhem, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: To evaluate the intrarenal pressure parameters of the 9.2 Fr (5.1 Fr working channel) and 7.5 Fr (3.6 Fr working channel) flexible ureteroscopes with direct-in-scope suction (DISS) in an Material and methods: We performed an experimental study using an Results: Higher IRPs were documented when the 9.2 Fr flexible ureteroscope was used compared to the 7.5 Fr scope, regardless of the irrigation setup. The highest IRP (45 mmHg) was documented with the 9.2 Fr scope, using manual pump irrigation and intermittent pumping with no suction. In contrast, the lowest IRP was reported with the 7.5 Fr scope and the automated pump at 40 mmHg. The pressure difference following 1second of suctioning was more pronounced with 9.2 Fr compared to 7.5 Fr. The 9.2 Fr ureteroscope with the 5.1 Fr working channel resulted in significantly shorter time to regain the initial IRP. Conclusions: For the first time in experimental studies we noted that irrigation through a wider 5.1 Fr working channel raises the baseline IRP faster than the classic 3.6 Fr working channel. Although these findings should be further investigated in a clinical setting, they should be taken into consideration to select the optimal strategy, to keep IRP at safe levels, and avoid complications.

Indexed as

basic researchDISSintrarenal pressuresRIRSsuction

Identifiers

PMID41322450
PMCPMC12663809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.