Purpose: To evaluate in vitro the maximum pressure generated in an artificial kidney model when people of different levels of strengths used various irrigation systems. Materials and Methods: Fifteen people were enrolled and divided into three groups based on their strengths. Individual strength was evaluated according to the maximum pressure each participant was able to achieve using an Encore™ Inflator. The irrigation systems evaluated were as follows: T-Flow™ Dual Port, Hiline™, continuous flow single action pumping system (SAPS™) with the system close and open, Irri-flo II™, a simple 60-mL syringe, and Peditrol™. Each irrigation system was connected to URF-V2 ureteroscope, which was inserted into an artificial kidney model. Each participant was asked to produce the maximum pressure possible with every irrigation device. Pressure was measured with the working channel (WC) empty, with a laser fiber, and a basket inside. Results: The highest pressure was achieved with the 60 mL-syringe system and the lowest with SAPS continuous version system (with continuous irrigation open), compared to the other irrigation devices (p < 0.0001). Irrespective of the irrigation system, there was a significant difference in the pressure between the WC empty and when occupied with the laser fiber or the basket inside it (p < 0.0001). The stratification between the groups showed that the most powerful group could produce the highest pressure in the kidney model with all the irrigation devices in almost any situation. The exception to this was the T-Flow system, which was the only device where no statistical differences were detected among these groups. Conclusion: The use of irrigation systems can often generate excessive pressure in an artificial kidney model, especially with an unoccupied WC of the ureteroscope. Depending on the strength of force applied, very high pressure can be generated by most irrigation devices irrespective of whether the scope is occupied or not.

Background: With recent technological advancement, new and improved endoscopic instruments and laser devices have catapulted flexible ureteroscopy to the forefront, hence making retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) a popular choice for the management of renal stones. However, RIRS has also resulted in an increasing number of work-related musculoskeletal disorders, which can have a detrimental impact on surgeons' physical health and operative lifespan. The aim of our review is to examine the impact and feasibility of ergonomic adjustments and outline future directions and recommendations to improve the awareness of and reduce the prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries among urologists. Methods: This study was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A thorough literature review was conducted of several databases using the following keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms to generate a search strategy: nephrolithiasis, kidney calculus, renal calculus, staghorn calculus, ergonomics, position, fatigue, comfort, tire, physical strain, visual strain, muscle, ureteroscopy, RIRS, laser, and lithotripsy. Studies were chosen for inclusion by reviewers independently, and the data were consolidated for analysis. Results: A total of 1446 articles were identified on initial literature search; 23 were included in the final analysis. The impact of various ergonomic modifications on operative outcomes, surgeons, surgical equipment, and patients, was analyzed. In addition, we summarized all the improvements that resulted in better ergonomics in RIRS. Conclusion: Ergonomics in RIRS is poorly understood and there are currently no formal guidelines for this aspect. While modern endourology armamentarium seems to help with procedural ergonomics, more needs to be done to enhance surgeon comfort, protect surgeon longevity, and prioritize the health and safety of endourologists.

This study sought to analyze the ablation rates of Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (TFL) under different settings combinations. Lasering was carried out by a computed spiral pattern through a stepper motor bearing a laser fiber. BegoStones were placed inside a water container and lasered therein and the ablation rate was calculated. Different combinations were tested for ~12 Watts (W) for Ho:YAG and TFL lasers. Further 25 W combination for TFL were conducted testing higher frequencies. One-hundred-one experiments were conducted. Under ~12 W, the highest ablation rate for Ho:YAG was obtained with 40 Hz/0.3 J, and Virtual Basket™ (VB) emission mode [114.35 (88.30 – 126.40) mg/min] whereas for TFL, using 40 Hz/0.3 J, and long pulse [143.40 (137.40 – 146) mg/min]. A matched-comparison for 12 Hz/1 J settings showed that TFL outperformed Ho:YAG using medium pulse [63.30 (55.30 – 81.30) vs 132.00 (115.70 – 228.60) mg/min, p=0.016] and long pulse [62.90 (51.60 – 78.90) vs 134.70 (110.60 – 149.30) mg/min, p=0.016]. In the 40 Hz/0.3 J settings, TFL outperformed Ho:YAG (p=0.034). Nonetheless, Ho:YAG with VB’s ablation rate increased [114.35 (88.30 – 126.40)], being comparable to that of TFL with medium pulse [127.5 (88.90 – 141.70)] (p=0.400). In TFL 25 W experiments, the ablation rate of 500 Hz / 0.05 J, was higher than those of 1000 Hz / 0.025 J (p=0.049). TFL ablation rate is higher than that of Ho:YAG. Moreover, the Virtual Basket™ emission mode, increased Ho:YAG ablation rates, resulting reaching similar to that of TFL in certain modalities.

Purpose: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the gold-standard treatment for large renal calculi. Despite its efficacy, complications can occur. This narrative review aims to classify, manage, and prevent PCNL complications, emphasizing risk factors and strategies to optimize outcomes. Findings: PCNL is a safe and highly effective procedure for the management of renal stones. Risk factors include patient comorbidities, stone complexity, prolonged surgical time, and improper access. Proactive measures, such as accurate imaging, antibiotic prophylaxis, and careful surgical techniques, reduce complication rates. Although certain complications may affect surgical outcomes, most are effectively managed through conservative or minimally invasive approaches. Proficiency in the technique is essential for reducing the risk of complications. Conclusions: Understanding the classification, risk factors, and management of PCNL complications is essential for optimizing patient outcomes. Comprehensive preoperative planning, meticulous surgical technique, and tailored postoperative care are critical for minimizing risks and improving procedural safety.