In vivo ureteroscopic intrarenal pressures and clinical outcomes: a multi-institutional analysis of 120 consecutive patients
- PMID: 37656050
- DOI: 10.1111/bju.16169
In vivo ureteroscopic intrarenal pressures and clinical outcomes: a multi-institutional analysis of 120 consecutive patients
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the pressure range generated in the human renal collecting system during ureteroscopy (URS), in a large patient sample, and to investigate a relationship between intrarenal pressure (IRP) and outcome.
Patients and methods: A prospective multi-institutional study was conducted, with ethics board approval; February 2022-March 2023. Recruitment was of 120 consecutive consenting adult patients undergoing semi-rigid URS and/or flexible ureterorenoscopy (FURS) for urolithiasis or diagnostic purposes. Retrograde, fluoroscopy-guided insertion of a 0.036-cm (0.014″) pressure guidewire (COMET™ II, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) to the renal pelvis was performed. Baseline and continuous ureteroscopic IRP was recorded, alongside relevant operative variables. A 30-day follow-up was completed. Descriptive statistics were applied to IRP traces, with mean (sd) and maximum values and variance reported. Relationships between IRP and technical variables, and IRP and clinical outcome were interrogated using the chi-square test and independent samples t-test.
Results: A total of 430 pressure traces were analysed from 120 patient episodes. The mean (sd) baseline IRP was 16.45 (5.99) mmHg and the intraoperative IRP varied by technique. The mean (sd) IRP during semi-rigid URS with gravity irrigation was 34.93 (11.66) mmHg. FURS resulted in variable IRP values: from a mean (sd) of 26.78 (5.84) mmHg (gravity irrigation; 12/14-F ureteric access sheath [UAS]) to 87.27 (66.85) mmHg (200 mmHg pressurised-bag irrigation; 11/13-F UAS). The highest single pressure peak was 334.2 mmHg, during retrograde pyelography. Six patients (5%) developed postoperative urosepsis; these patients had significantly higher IRPs during FURS (mean [sd] 81.7 [49.52] mmHg) than controls (38.53 [22.6] mmHg; P < 0.001).
Conclusions: A dynamic IRP profile is observed during human in vivo URS, with IRP frequently exceeding expected thresholds. A relationship appears to exist between elevated IRP and postoperative urosepsis.
Keywords: COMET II; adverse events following ureteroscopy; complications of ureteroscopy; endourology; flexible ureterorenoscopy; intrarenal pressure; pressure guidewire; renal pelvic pressure; retrograde pyelography; ureteroscopy.
© 2023 The Authors. BJU International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJU International.
References
-
- Osther PJ, Pedersen KV, Lildal SK et al. Pathophysiological aspects of ureterorenoscopic management of upper urinary tract calculi. Curr Opin Urol 2016; 26: 63-69
-
- Croghan SM, Skolarikos A, Jack GS et al. Upper urinary tract pressures in endourology: a systematic review of range, variables and implications. BJU Int 2022; 131: 267-279
-
- Green N, Fingerhut AG, French S. Mechanism of renovascular backflow. A pathophysiologic study. Radiology 1969; 92: 531-536
-
- Boccafoschi C, Lugnani F. Intra-renal reflux. Urol Res 1985; 13: 253-258
-
- Kreydin EI, Eisner BH. Risk factors for sepsis after percutaneous renal stone surgery. Nat Rev Urol 2013; 10: 598-605
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
