• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

欧洲泌尿外科学会腔内泌尿外科分会和渐进性腔内泌尿外科研究与领先解决方案协会开展的一项全球调查,以评估泌尿外科医生对腔内泌尿外科吸引技术的态度。

A Global Survey to Assess Urologists' Attitudes Towards Suction Technology in Endourology by the European Association of Urology Section of Endourology and Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions.

作者信息

Gauhar Vineet, Somani Bhaskar K, Seitz Christian, Castellani Daniele, Tefik Tzevat, Persaud Satyendra, Ragoori Deepak, Gauhar Vishesh, Tan Karl, Lakmichi Mohamed Amine, Gadzhiev Nariman, Malkhasyan Vigen, Kamal Wissam, Tanidir Yiloren, Chai Chu Ann, Tursunkulov Azimdjon N, Farahat Yasser, Keller Etienne Xavier, Chew Ben H, Herrmann Thomas, Traxer Olivier, Yuen Steffi Kar Kei

机构信息

Department of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.

Department of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.

出版信息

Urology. 2025 Mar;197:42-50. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2024.12.009. Epub 2024 Dec 16.

DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2024.12.009
PMID:39674378
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess urologists' perceptions and current practices of using suction-based techniques and technologies in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A customized web-based 28-item questionnaire was created. All participation was voluntary. The survey was hosted on Google Forms between November 15, 2023 and November 25, 2023. Descriptive statistics were applied to demographic details and categorical responses.

RESULTS

Six hundred thirty-two responses were received. 56.5% were from Asia. Around 41.6% of respondents underwent an endourology fellowship. Personal experience of suction for PCNL was noted in 55.4% and 42.7% for RIRS. Exactly 34.9% believe that currently there is enough evidence that suction can improve stone-free rates and lower complications for both endourology surgeries. Around 55.69% believe that as evidence evolves, suction has the potential to be a game changer in endourology management of urolithiasis. Exactly 55.7% believe that the leading barrier to the adoption of suction in endourology is the lack of availability of technology. Other barriers include lack of procedural standardization (37.65%), lack of evidence (34.9%), lack of proper training (29.58%) and lack of advocation in the current guidelines (17.72%).

CONCLUSION

Our survey shows that urologists are keen to adopt suction for PCNL and RIRS but the lack of definitive evidence, standardization, equipment availability and training preclude them from using so. More high-level evidence regarding the utility of suction in endourology is required for its routine adoption in clinical practice.

摘要

目的

评估泌尿外科医生在经皮肾镜取石术(PCNL)和逆行肾内手术(RIRS)治疗肾结石中对基于吸引的技术和设备的认知及当前使用情况。

材料与方法

创建了一份基于网络的包含28个条目的定制问卷。所有参与均为自愿。该调查于2023年11月15日至2023年11月25日在谷歌表单上进行。对人口统计学细节和分类回答应用描述性统计。

结果

共收到632份回复。56.5%来自亚洲。约41.6%的受访者参加过腔内泌尿外科进修。55.4%的受访者有PCNL吸引的个人经验,RIRS为42.7%。确切地说,34.9%的人认为目前有足够证据表明吸引可提高两种腔内泌尿外科手术的无石率并降低并发症。约55.69%的人认为随着证据的发展,吸引有可能成为泌尿外科结石病管理的变革性因素。确切地说,55.7%的人认为腔内泌尿外科采用吸引的主要障碍是技术可用性不足。其他障碍包括缺乏操作标准化(37.65%)、缺乏证据(34.9%)、缺乏适当培训(29.58%)以及当前指南中缺乏倡导(17.72%)。

结论

我们的调查表明,泌尿外科医生渴望在PCNL和RIRS中采用吸引,但缺乏确凿证据、标准化、设备可用性和培训使他们无法这样做。在临床实践中常规采用吸引需要更多关于其在腔内泌尿外科效用的高级别证据。

相似文献

1
A Global Survey to Assess Urologists' Attitudes Towards Suction Technology in Endourology by the European Association of Urology Section of Endourology and Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions.欧洲泌尿外科学会腔内泌尿外科分会和渐进性腔内泌尿外科研究与领先解决方案协会开展的一项全球调查,以评估泌尿外科医生对腔内泌尿外科吸引技术的态度。
Urology. 2025 Mar;197:42-50. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2024.12.009. Epub 2024 Dec 16.
2
Management of urinary stones by experts in stone disease (ESD 2025).结石病专家对尿路结石的管理(2025年结石病专家共识)
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2025 Jun 30;97(2):14085. doi: 10.4081/aiua.2025.14085.
3
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults.经皮肾镜碎石术与逆行性肾内手术治疗成人肾结石。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 13;11(11):CD013445. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013445.pub2.
4
Comparison of Treatment Outcomes for Fluoroscopic and Fluoroscopy-free Endourological Procedures: A Systematic Review on Behalf of the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel.比较有创和无创腔内泌尿外科手术治疗效果的系统评价:代表欧洲泌尿外科学会结石诊疗指南专家组
Eur Urol Focus. 2023 Nov;9(6):938-953. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2023.05.008. Epub 2023 Jun 3.
5
Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery versus percutaneuos nephrolithotomy for complex pediatric stone disease: A comparative analysis of efficacy and safety.内镜下联合肾内手术与经皮肾镜碎石术治疗复杂小儿肾结石病:疗效和安全性的对比分析。
J Pediatr Urol. 2024 Aug;20(4):606.e1-606.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2024.05.025. Epub 2024 May 31.
6
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones.体外冲击波碎石术 (ESWL) 与经皮肾镜碎石取石术 (PCNL) 或逆行肾内手术 (RIRS) 治疗肾结石的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Aug 1;8(8):CD007044. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007044.pub4.
7
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.经皮肾镜碎石术与逆行性肾内手术:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur Urol. 2015 Jan;67(1):125-137. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.07.003. Epub 2014 Jul 23.
8
Tranexamic acid for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.氨甲环酸在经皮肾镜碎石术中的应用。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Oct 26;10(10):CD015122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015122.pub2.
9
Tract Sizes in Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Systematic Review from the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel.微创经皮肾取石术中的通道大小:欧洲泌尿外科学会结石指南专家组的系统评价。
Eur Urol. 2017 Aug;72(2):220-235. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.01.046. Epub 2017 Feb 23.
10
Comparison of self-administered survey questionnaire responses collected using mobile apps versus other methods.使用移动应用程序与其他方法收集的自我管理调查问卷回复的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 27;2015(7):MR000042. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000042.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Flexible ureteroscopy for renal stones comparing non suction conventional UAS vs flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths in a multicenter real-world experience. Is it finally time to bury the no suction ureteral access sheath? An EAU endourology analysis.多中心真实世界经验中,比较非抽吸传统输尿管镜鞘与可弯曲及可导航抽吸输尿管镜鞘在肾结石治疗中的应用。是时候淘汰非抽吸输尿管镜鞘了吗?一项欧洲泌尿外科学会腔内泌尿外科分析。
World J Urol. 2025 Jun 25;43(1):390. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05748-5.
2
Direct-in-scope suction with a 5.1Fr large working channel ureteroscope: what stone dust size for effective evacuation during laser lithotripsy? An in vitro analysis by PEARLS and section of EAU Endourology.使用5.1Fr大工作通道输尿管镜进行直视下吸引:在激光碎石术中,何种结石粉尘大小可实现有效清除?PEARLS及欧洲泌尿外科学会腔内泌尿外科分会的体外分析
World J Urol. 2025 Mar 31;43(1):198. doi: 10.1007/s00345-025-05579-4.