Publication:
Worldwide survey of flexible ureteroscopy practice: a survey from European Association of Urology sections of young academic urologists and uro-technology groups

dc.contributor.authorŞENER, TARIK EMRE
dc.contributor.authorsPietropaolo, Amelia; Bres-Niewada, Ewa; Skolarikos, Andreas; Liatsikos, Evangelos; Kallidonis, Panagiotis; Aboumarzouk, Omar; Tailly, Thomas; Proietti, Silvia; Traxer, Oliver; Giusti, Guido; Rukin, Nick; Ozsoy, Mehmet; Talso, Michele; Emre, Sener Tarik; Emiliani, Esteban; Atis, Gokhan; Somani, Bhaskar K.
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-14T10:03:54Z
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-11T15:14:41Z
dc.date.available2022-03-14T10:03:54Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.description.abstractIntroduction To understand the current practice of flexible ureteroscopy (fURS), we conducted a worldwide survey among urologists with a special interest in endourology. Material and methods A 42-question survey was designed after an initial consultation with European Association of Urology young academic urologists (YAU) and uro-technology (ESUT) groups. This was distributed via the SurveyMonkey (R) platform and an ESUT meeting to cover practice patterns and techniques in regard to ureteroscopy usage worldwide. Results A total of 114 completed responses were obtained. A safety guidewire was reportedly used by 84.5% of endourologists, an access sheath was always or almost always used by 71% and a reusable laser fibre was used by two-thirds of respondents. While a combination of dusting and fragmentation was used by 47% as a preferred mode of intra-renal stone treatment, some used dusting (43%) or fragmentation with basketing (10%). Disposable scopes were only used by 40% and three quarters of them used it for challenging cases only. Antibiotic prophylaxis was limited to a single peri-operative dose by two-thirds (67%) of respondents. The procedural time was limited to between 1-2 hours by two-thirds (70%) of respondents and very rarely (7.4%) it exceeded 2 hours. The irrigation method varied between manual pump (46%), mechanical irrigation (22%) or gravity irrigation (27%). Conclusions Our survey shows a wide variation in the available endourological armamentarium and surgical practice amongst urologists. However, there seems to be a broad agreement in the use of peri-operative antibiotics, access sheath usage, method of stone treatment and the use of post-operative stent.
dc.identifier.doi10.5173/ceju.2019.0041
dc.identifier.eissn2080-4873
dc.identifier.issn2080-4806
dc.identifier.pubmed32015909
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11424/243987
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000505063500009
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherPOLISH UROLOGICAL ASSOC
dc.relation.ispartofCENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectsurvey
dc.subjectureteroscopy
dc.subjectendourology
dc.subjecturolithiasis
dc.subjectlaser
dc.subjectstone
dc.subjectflexible
dc.subjectaccess sheath
dc.subjectfragmentation
dc.subjectSTONE DISEASE
dc.subjectCOMPLICATIONS
dc.subjectUROLITHIASIS
dc.subjectTRENDS
dc.subjectULTRA
dc.subjectCOST
dc.titleWorldwide survey of flexible ureteroscopy practice: a survey from European Association of Urology sections of young academic urologists and uro-technology groups
dc.typearticle
dc.typearticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage397
oaire.citation.issue4
oaire.citation.startPage393
oaire.citation.titleCENTRAL EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
oaire.citation.volume72

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
file.pdf
Size:
556.19 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format