Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41718804›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2026

Suction, flexion, and noise profile of three flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths: a benchtop comparison.

Connor A Church, Elijah Haynal, Ye Jean Lim, Ye Na Diana Lim, Frankis Almaguel, Elizabeth A Baldwin, Ruben Crew, Matthew Buell, Ali Albaghli, D Duane Baldwin

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Connor A ChurchDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Elijah HaynalDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Ye Jean LimDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Ye Na Diana LimDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Frankis AlmaguelDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Elizabeth A BaldwinDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Ruben CrewDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Matthew BuellDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Ali AlbaghliDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
D Duane BaldwinDepartment of Urology, Loma Linda University Health, 11234 Anderson Street, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA. dbaldwin@llu.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFlexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS) have revolutionized treatment of urinary stones, and we hypothesized that different sheaths may have different functional characteristics. The purpose of this study was to compare 3 different FANS in a benchtop kidney/ureter model.

methodsThree 12/14 Fr FANS were compared in a 3D-printed silicon kidney/ureter model: Dornier Hoover, Wellead ClearPetra, and Vathin. Randomized stone-suction trials were done in the upper, interpolar, and lower poles. Maximum deflection using 6.3 and 7.5 Fr flexible ureteroscopes, deflection control force, suction flow rates, and noise levels were also compared.

resultsHoover and ClearPetra FANS suctioned more fragments than Vathin when all kidney trials were considered (p < 0.01 for all). Comparing deflection, Hoover and Vathin had greater downward deflection compared to ClearPetra for both ureteroscopes (p < 0.005). Hoover upward deflection exceeded ClearPetra for both ureteroscopes (p < 0.008) and Vathin using the 6.3 Fr ureteroscope (p < 0.001). Deflection control force was less for Hoover and Vathin than ClearPetra at all angles in both directions (p < 0.001). Suction flow rates were higher for Hoover and ClearPetra compared to Vathin. At maximum deflection, ClearPetra flow rate exceeded Hoover (p < 0.001). ClearPetra was quietest during suction (54.5dB), while Vathin was loudest (74.0dB) (p < 0.001).

conclusionWhen comparing all kidney trials, Hoover and ClearPetra FANS outperformed Vathin in stone suction. Hoover and Vathin showed greater deflection and lower deflection force compared to ClearPetra. ClearPetra had higher flow rates and was quieter.

Indexed as

UreteroscopesUreteroscopyEquipment DesignHumansSuctionUreterKidney stonesRetrograde intrarenal surgeryUreteral access sheathUreteroscopyUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID41718804
PMCPMC12923460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.