Purpose To look at the bibliometric publication trends on ‘Urolithiasis’ and aspects of treatment and training associated with it over a period of 16 years from 2000 to 2015. To this end, we conducted this study to look at the publication trends associated with urolithiasis, including the use of simulation, laser technology, and all types of interventions for it. Materials and methods We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed over the last 16 years, from January 2000 to December 2015 for all published papers on ‘Urolithiasis’. While there were no language restrictions, English language articles and all non-English language papers with published English abstracts were also included. Case reports, animal and laboratory studies, and those studies that did not have a published abstract were excluded from our analysis. We also analyzed the data in two time periods, period-1 (2000–2007) and period-2 (2008–2015). Results During the last 16 years, a total of 5343 papers were published on ‘Urolithiasis’, including 4787 in English language and 556 in non-English language. This included papers on URS (n = 1200), PCNL (n = 1715), SWL (n = 887), open stone surgery (n = 87), laparoscopic stone surgery (n = 209), pyelolithotomy (n = 35), simulation in Endourology (n = 82), and use of laser for stone surgery (n = 406). When comparing the two time periods, during period 2, the change was +171% (p = 0.007), +279% (p < 0.001), and −17% (p = 0.2) for URS, PCNL, and SWL, respectively. While there was a rise in laparoscopic surgery (+116%), it decreased for open stone surgery (−11%) and pyelolithotomy (−47%). A total of 82 papers have been published on simulation for stone surgery including 48 papers for URS (67% rise in period-2, p = 0.007), and 34 papers for PCNL (480% rise in period-2, p < 0.001). A rising trend for the use of laser was also seen in period 2 (increase of 126%, p < 0.02, from 124 papers to 281 papers). Conclusions Published papers on intervention for Urolithiasis have risen over the last 16 years. While there has been a steep rise of URS and minimally invasive PCNL techniques, SWL and open surgery have shown a slight decline over this period. A similar increase has also been seen for the use of simulation and lasers in Endourology.

Ureteral access sheaths (UASs) are part of urologist’s armamentarium when performing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Recently, the world of RIRS has changed dramatically with the development of three game-changers: thulium fiber laser (TFL), smaller size single use digital flexible ureterosopes and intraoperative intrarenal pressure (IRP) measurement devices. We aimed to clarify the impact of UASs on IRP, complications and SFRs and put its indications in perspective of these three major technological improvements. A systematic review of the literature using the Medline, Scopus and Web of Science databases was performed by two authors and relevant studies were selected according to PRISMA guidelines. Recent studies showed that using a UAS lowers IRP and intrarenal temperature by increasing irrigation outflow during RIRS. Data on the impact of a UAS on SFRs, postoperative pain, risk of infectious complications, risk of ureteral strictures and risk of bladder recurrence of urothelial carcinoma after diagnostic RIRS were inconclusive. Prestenting for at least one week resulted in ureteral enlargement, while the influence of pre-operative administration of alpha-blockers was unclear. Since TFL, smaller single use digital ureteroscopes and devices with integrated pressure-measuring and aspiration technology seemed to increase SFRs and decrease pressure and temperature related complications, indications on the use of a UAS may decrease in the near future.

Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL) has had recent advancements with the more powerful laser systems with the ability to ‘dust’ and ‘pop-dust’ the stone. We wanted to look at the outcomes of this method for large stones (≥ 15 mm) using our new 100 W holmium laser. Over a period of 16 months (January 2017–April 2018), 50 patients underwent URSL for minimum cumulative stone size of ≥ 15 mm. Data were collected prospectively on patient and stone demographics and outcomes of URSL. The laser setting used was a power of 0.3–0.6 J and a frequency of 20–50 Hz using a long-pulse setting with a 272-µm fiber. Fifty patients underwent 55 URSL procedures (5 bilateral procedures) using dusting and pop-dusting settings. The mean age was 58 years (range 2–88 years) with a male:female ratio of 35:15. The mean single and overall stone size were 10.3 mm (3–23 mm) and 21 mm (range 15–52 mm) with two-thirds of all patients (65%) having multiple stones. The stone location was in the kidney (n = 65, 78%), in the ureter (n = 19, 22%) and 5 patients had bilateral renal stones. With a mean operating time of 51 min, the initial and final SFR were 93 and 98%, respectively. A pre-operative stent, access sheath and a post-operative stent were present in 29 (53%), 34 (62%) and 51 (93%) procedures, respectively. Over a mean hospital stay of 0.6 days (74% day-case procedures), there was one Clavien IV complication related to urosepsis but without any other major or minor complications. Dusting and pop-dusting techniques achieve an excellent SFR with low risk of complications even for large stones. This might set a new benchmark for treating large stones, bilateral or multiple stones in a single setting, without the need for secondary procedures in most cases.

Objective: The incidence of kidney stone disease (KSD) is rising worldwide; hence, more focus must be directed toward its etiology and risk factors. Increasing fluid intake is recommended as the most ideal prevention; yet, there is inconsistent evidence surrounding optimum volumes and types of fluid that affect stone formation. This review aimed to analyze the published literature on fluid intake and types of fluid consumed and their impact on KSD prevention. Material and methods: Papers were acquired from databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. Included English language studies that involved adults consuming beverages along with a standardized diet in relation to KSD. Those failing to control dietary factors were excluded. Results: After an initial search of 1099 papers, 9 (541 participants) were included in the final review. Six varieties of water and ten different types of juices were investigated. Higher fluid intake was associated with increased urine output and reduced stone formation. Water with high calcium content seemingly increased the rate of calcium oxalate (CaOx) stone formation. The relative supersaturation of CaOx in urine was decreased with grapefruit, apple, orange juices, and sodas, whereas cranberry juice increased it. Plum juice and the energy drink Gatorade had no effect on stone formation. Conclusion: Fluids low in calcium seem to reduce the risk of KSD. Certain varieties of fluid, such as grapefruit, apple, and orange juices reduce urine CaOx saturation, with a subsequent reduction in stone formation. Findings from this review could contribute to primary prevention for those at risk of KSD. Cite this article as: Gamage KN, Jamnadass E, Sulaiman SK, Aboumarzouk O, Pietropaolo A, Somani BK. The role of fluid intake in the prevention of kidney stone disease: A systematic review over the last two decades. Turk J Urol 2020; 46(Supp. 1): S92-S103.

Urological organizations publish detailed evidence-based guidelines to support the urologists in the management of urolithiasis. Our objective was to provide clear guidance on the management of urolithiasis, compare the American Urological Association (AUA) and European Association of Urologists (EAU) guidelines, and present an algorithm for different clinical scenarios. The latest AUA and EAU guidelines on urolithiasis were evaluated for the level of evidence and grade of recommendation. All recommendations on management of urolithiasis (surgical and medical management) were reviewed and included. Both the organizations provide guidance for initial patient assessment, imaging requirements, and therapeutic options, including surgical intervention and medical therapy. In addition, these guidelines provide advice for managing specific patient groups, including pediatric patients and pregnant patients. Although there is a general concordance between both the groups, differences exist particularly for recommended modality of surgical intervention depending on stone location and size. Although both the guidelines were broadly similar, we also highlighted the variations in the level of evidence and grade of recommendation. Although these guidelines provide a valuable evidence-based framework to support the management of urinary tract stones, their implementation must be tailored to individual patient needs and available resources. Cite this article as: Hughes T, Ho HC, Pietropaolo A, Somani BK. Guideline of guidelines for kidney and bladder stones. Turk J Urol 2020; 46(Supp. 1): S104-S112.

Introduction: With an increase in the prevalence of kidney stone disease (KSD), there has been a universal drive to develop reliable and user-friendly tools such as grading systems and predictive nomograms. An atlas of scoring systems, grading tools and nomograms in Endourology is provided in this paper. Methods: A comprehensive search of world literature was performed to identify nomograms, grading systems and classification tools in endourology related to KSD. Each of these were reviewed by the authors and have been evaluated in a narrative format with details on those which are externally validated and their respective citation count on google scholar. Results: A total of 54 endourological tools have been described in our atlas of endourological scoring systems, grading tools and nomograms. Of the tools, 23 (43%) are published in the last 3 years showing an increasing interest in this area. This includes 5 for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), 6 for flexible ureteroscopy (fURS), 3 for semi-rigid URS (sURS), 9 for shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), 2 for stent encrustations, 3 for intra-operative appearance at the time of URS and 3 to classify intra-operative ureteric injury. There were 3 tools for renal colic assessment, one each for prediction of future stone event, stone classification and stone impaction and 2 for need of emergency intervention in ureteric stone. While 2 tools are related to stone recurrence, 6 are related to post-procedural complications. There are now 2 tools for simulation in endourology and 5 for patient reported outcome measures (PROMS). Conclusions: A number of reliable and established tools exist currently in endourology. Each of these offers their own respective advantages and disadvantages. While nomograms and scoring systems can help in the decision making, these must be tailored to individual patients based on their specific clinical scenarios, expectations and informed consent.