The efficacy and safety of three different single-use ureteroscopes in retrograde intrarenal surgery: a comparative analysis of a single surgeon's experience in a single center.

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the clinical results of different single-use flexible ureteroscopes (su-fURS) used in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RIRS cases performed identically by an experienced surgeon between 2022 and 2023 in a single center were retrospectively analyzed. These surgeries were performed with three su-fURS (Redpine RP-U-C12, Hugemed HU30, and Pusen Uscope 3022 A). In the study, the age, gender, body mass index, and Charlson comorbidity index of the patients were compared, along with their clinical details, such as the stone size, volume, density, location, and history of hydronephrosis or a double J stent or SWL. Operation time, stone-free rates (SFR), perioperative and postoperative complications, and hospitalization times were also compared.

RESULTS

The study included 208 patients. Pusen had 63 cases, Hugemed had 62, and Redpine had 83. The comparison of the patient's demographic and clinical properties with stone-related variables was similar between the groups. The SFR was similar between the groups (p = 0.056). Perioperative, postoperative, and total complication rates and the need for a second intervention showed no significant differences among the three groups (p = 0.324, 0.088, 0.061, and 0.052, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In the first study comparing the clinical results of cases in which different su-fURS were used, no difference was observed in surgical outcomes and complications, even though the technical features of these devices were different. Urologists should select su-fURS based on clinical requirements, financial constraints, and personal experiences.