ArticleThe Canadian journal of urology2026
Clinical evaluation and related factor analysis of intrarenal pressure using a Chinese-made disposable pressure-measuring flexible ureteroscope.
Article in The Canadian 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.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe pressure fluctuations during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) can cause related complications, so precise monitoring and control of intrarenal pressure (IRP) play an important role. This study aimed to assess the clinical value of a Chinese-made disposable pressure-measuring flexible ureteroscope in monitoring IRP during RIRS for upper urinary tract stones <2 cm, and analyze factors affecting IRP.
methodsIn this prospective single-arm study, 35 patients (38 renal units) underwent RIRS. Mean age was 42.3 ± 6.1 years, body mass index (BMI) 24.2 ± 2.6 kg/m², and maximum stone diameter 1.6 ± 0.4 cm. Stones were located in the ureter (21.1%), kidney and ureter (15.8%), or kidney only (63.2%). IRP threshold was 30 mmHg; irrigation used gravity or low-pressure pump. Ureteral access sheath (UAS) size (Fr11-13 or Fr12-14) was selected based on ureteroscopy. Outcomes included safe IRP (<30 mmHg), high/maximum IRP, cumulative time above threshold, influencing factors, infection markers, fever incidence, operative time, stone-free rate, and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score.
resultsAll procedures succeeded. Mean safe IRP was 10.9 ± 3.4 mmHg, high IRP 63.6 ± 13.5 mmHg, and maximum IRP 181.2 ± 50.5 mmHg. Mean cumulative time above threshold was 485.2 ± 61.3 s. Low-position UAS placement led to significantly higher high IRP, maximum IRP, and longer high-pressure time compared to conventional placement (all p < 0.05). UAS size did not significantly affect IRP. Postoperative infection markers showed no difference between mean IRP subgroups (0-30 mmHg vs. 30-60 mmHg). Overweight patients had higher mean IRP than normal BMI patients (26.1 ± 4.2 vs. 15.9 ± 5.7 mmHg, p < 0.05). Postoperative fever occurred in 3 cases (8.6%), all with high IRP and prolonged high-pressure exposure. Operative time averaged 45.2 ± 8.3 min, stone-free rate was 92.1%, and mean VAS score was 2.52 ± 0.21. No major complications occurred.
conclusionsThe disposable pressure-measuring flexible ureteroscope enables real-time IRP monitoring during RIRS, allowing surgical strategy adjustments to improve safety. Low UAS position and high BMI are risk factors for elevated IRP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42415589What 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.