Search

Objective: Different simulation modalities may be utilised in a curricular fashion to benefit from the strengths of each training model. The aim of this study is to evaluate a novel multi-modality ureterorenoscopy (URS) simulation curriculum in terms of educational value, content validity, transfer of skills and inter-rater reliability., Methods: This international prospective study recruited urology residents (n = 46) with ≤ 10 URS experience and no prior simulation training. Participants were guided through each phase of the expert-developed SIMULATE URS curriculum by trainers and followed-up in the operating room (OR). Video recordings were obtained during training. A post-training evaluation survey was distributed to evaluate content validity and educational value, using descriptive statistics. Performance was evaluated using the objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) scale to measure improvement in scores throughout the curriculum. Pearson's correlation coefficient and Cohen's kappa tests were utilised to investigate correlation and agreement between raters., Results: Participants reported gaining OR-transferrable skills (Mean: 4.33 ± 0.67) and demonstrated marked improvement in throughout the curriculum, transferred to the OR for both semi-rigid URS (p = 0.004) and flexible URS (p = 0.007). 70% of participants were successfully followed-up in the OR (n = 32). No differences were identified with the additional use of fresh frozen cadavers (p = 0.85, p = 0.90) and the URO Mentor VR simulator (p = 0.13, p = 0.22). A moderate level of correlation was noted on the video OSATS assessments, between two expert assessors (r = 0.70), but a poor agreement with the live rating., Conclusion: The SIMULATE URS training curriculum received high educational value from participants, who demonstrated statistically significant improvement with consecutive cases throughout the curriculum and transferability of skills to the OR in both semi-rigid and flexible URS., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Purpose: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of RIRS, SWL and PCNL for lower calyceal stones sized 1-2 cm., Materials and Methods: Patients with a single lower calyceal stone with an evidence of a CT diameter between 1 and 2 cm were enrolled in this multicenter, randomized, unblinded, clinical trial study. Patients were randomized into three groups: group A: SWL (194 pts); group B: RIRS (207 pts); group C: PCNL (181 pts). Patients were evaluated with KUB radiography (US for uric acid stones) at day 10 and a CT scan after 3 months. The CONSORT 2010 statement was adhered to where possible. The collected data were analyzed., Results: The mean stone size was 13.78 mm in group A, 14.82 mm in group B and 15.23 mm in group C (p = 0.34). Group C compared to group B showed longer operative time [72.3 vs. 55.8 min (p = 0.082)], fluoroscopic time [175.6 vs. 31.8 min (p = 0.004)] and hospital stay [3.7 vs. 1.3 days (p = 0.039)]. The overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 61.8% for group A, 82.1% for group B and 87.3% for group C. The re-treatment rate was significantly higher in group A compared to the other two groups, 61.3% (p < 0.05). The auxiliary procedure rate was comparable for groups A and B and lower for group C (p < 0.05). The complication rate was 6.7, 14.5 and 19.3% for groups A, B and C, respectively., Conclusions: RIRS and PCNL were more effective than SWL to obtain a better SFR and less auxiliary and re-treatment rate in single lower calyceal stone with a CT diameter between 1 and 2 cm. RIRS compared to PCNL offers the best outcome in terms of procedure length, radiation exposure and hospital stay. ISRCTN 55546280.

Purpose: This is a prospective multicentric comparative study evaluating the performance of XenX-a new dual-purpose device for the prevention of stone fragments migration during ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URS)., Methods: Between March 2014 and January 2015, 41 patients undertaking URS + XenX were matched with 41 patients undergoing standard URS. Patients included had unilateral ureteric stone(s) of 0.5-1.5 cm in maximum size. Demographics, complication rates and surgical outcomes were recorded for comparison. A Likert-like 5-grade scoring system was used for surgeons' evaluation of XenX properties. Cost analysis was performed by comparing weighted mean costs of the relevant procedures., Results: Patients' characteristics between the two groups were comparable. Lasering time was longer for XenX group (13.59 vs. 5.17 min; p = 0.0001) whilst use of basket and need of JJ stent insertion was more frequent in control group (19.5 vs. 97.6 %; p = 0.0001 and 22 vs. 35 %; p = 0.001, respectively). Intra-operative SFR was significantly higher for XenX group (100 vs. 85.4 %; p = 0.0001), but not at 4-week follow-up, after ancillary procedures were needed in 17.1 % of the control group. Surgeons' evaluations for XenX were suboptimal for "Ease of Basketing" (2/5) and "Advancement of double J stent" (3/5). The use of XenX increased costs of procedures, but spared the costs associated to ancillary procedures and stent removals., Conclusions: XenX confirmed to be a safe and effective device especially for the treatment of upper ureteric tract stones; moreover, XenX may reduce the risk for the need of auxiliary procedures and for the insertion of a JJ stent.