ArticleBMC urology2026
Optimizing flexible and navigable ureteral access sheaths (FANS) manoeuvrability: the impact of sheath size, working channel occupancy and deflection technique - an EAU endourology in vitro analysis.
Article in BMC 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConventional ureteral access sheaths are placed below the ureteropelvic junction (UPJ), whereas the novel flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS) are navigated across the UPJ with its distal tip deflected into target calyx under endoscopic guidance to facilitate stone fragments suctioning. We evaluate how FANS deflection angles are affected by sheath sizes, occupancy of working channel (WC) (empty, occupied by Olympus Soltive™ Thulium Laser Fiber 150 μm and 200 μm core diameter) and deflection techniques (ureteroscope deflection versus sheath advancement) across four brands of FANS. MATERIALS &
methodsIn-vitro deflection angles of brand new FANS (sheath sizes 10/12Fr, 11/13Fr and 12/14Fr) ClearPetra (Well Lead Medical Co., Ltd, China) 46 cm, Elephant II (YiGao Medical Technology Co., Ltd, China) 50 cm, Innovex (Innovex Medical Co., Ltd, Shanghai, China) 50 cm, and Reborn (Hunan Reborn Medical Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd, China) 50 cm with brand new single-use flexible ureteroscope Pusen Uscope 7.5Fr PU3033A (Zhuhai Pusen Medical Technology Co., Ltd. Guangzhou, China) were measured in triplicate with varied WC occupancy and forementioned techniques. Maximum deflection angle was expressed as a mean of 3 measurements. One-way ANOVA test was performed for comparisons of the effect of sheath sizes, sheath brands, working channel occupancy, and different deflection techniques. Four-way ANOVA test was performed to evaluate the influence of the aforementioned four factors on the maximal deflection angle, with analysis on the main effects and interaction. For all tests, a two-sided p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical tests were performed with SPSS version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).
results10/12Fr and 11/13Fr sheath sizes have significantly better deflection angles than 12/14Fr across all brands with a 7.5Fr flexible ureteroscope. Sheath advancement technique was significantly better with ureteroscope deflection technique. There is no significant difference in deflection angles with occupancy of 150-200 μm fiber.
conclusionGaining better understanding of the performance of FANS can ultimately guide clinicians in their selection and optimal utilization of the instrument to enhance procedural efficacy and treatment outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.