Background: Stent placement before retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) can theoretically expand the ureter to improve access and remove stones. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of preoperative ureteral stenting on access and surgery. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent RIRS between January 2010 and December 2016 at multiple centers. The patients were divided into two groups based on whether or not a ureteral stent was inserted preoperatively. The characteristics of the stone (size, number, density, and location), the success rate of the access sheath placement, perioperative complications, operative times, hospitalization periods, the period for which the stents remained, postoperative urinary tract infection rates, stone-free rates, and additional treatment rates were analyzed. Results: Overall, 727 patients were included in the study (113 were pre-stented and 614 were non-stented). The median stone size was 12.2 mm. The overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 85.8% for the pre-stented group and 83.2% for the non-stented group, showing no significant (p = 0.498) difference between the two groups. Preoperative ureteral stenting improved the success rate of sheath placement (93.8% vs. 85.3%, p = 0.023) during surgery. The access sheath size in participants in the pre-stented group showed a tendency to be larger than that in participants in the non-stented group. However, there were no differences in perioperative complications, operative times, additional treatment rates, and stone-free rates. Conclusions: Although preoperative ureteral stenting did not affect operative outcomes, it increased the success rate of access sheath placement. Depending on the patient’s characteristics, preoperative ureteral stenting can be considered as an adjunctive option when access sheath insertion is considered during RIRS.

Tae BS, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2017 Nov;33(2):e13. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e13

The introduction of robotics has revolutionized surgery. Robotic platforms have also recently been introduced in clinical practice specifically for flexible ureteroscopy. In this paper, we look at the robotic platforms currently available for flexible ureteroscopy, describing their advantages and limitations. The following robotic platforms are discussed: Roboflex Avicenna^®, EasyUretero^®, and ILY^® robot. Finally, potential future advancements in this field are presented.

Cho SY. Korean J Urol. 2015 Oct;56(10):680-688. https://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2015.56.10.680