ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Single-use versus reusable flexible ureterorenoscopes with FANS: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis of outcomes in a large series from the EAU-Endourology Section and FANS Collaborative Group.
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stone extraction during flexible ureterorenoscopy with or without the hydrogel method: a randomized, multicenter safety and feasibility study.World journal of urology · 2025Trial
- Article
- Outcomes of suction mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy using disposable versus reusable sheaths: Real-world observations and inferences from the Suction Technology Utility in Mini-Percutaneous nephrolithotomy Study (STUMPS) registry.Asian journal of urology · 2026Article
- Outpatient versus inpatient flexible ureteroscopy with flexible and navigable suction access sheath: A multicenter comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes from the flexible and navigable access sheath collaborative study group.Asian journal of urology · 2026Article
- The future of endourology is now.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Flexible Ureteroscopy for Renal Stone Disease in Elderly Patients: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Reply to the letter for "Lasing strategy and its influence on 30-Day operative outcomes in flexible ureteroscopy with FANS: inferences from A Real-World prospective multicenter study by EAU-Endourology and AUSET".World journal of urology · 2026Article
- How do we choose the optimal length of flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS): an EAU endourology and AUSET prospective multicenter analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Lasing strategy and its influence on 30-day operative outcomes in flexible ureteroscopy with FANS: inferences from a real-world prospective multicenter study by EAU-endourology and AUSET.World journal of urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study compares the clinical outcomes of single-use and reusable flexible ureterorenoscopes (fURS) in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with flexible and navigable suction access sheath (FANS).
methodsA multicenter prospective analysis included 704 patients who underwent RIRS with FANS between July 2023 and March 2024. Patients were stratified into two groups: those treated with single-use fURS (Group 1, n = 263) and those with reusable fURS (Group 2, n = 441). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce confounding in the statistical comparisons. The primary outcomes were stone-free rate (SFR) and complication rates, assessed through pre- and postoperative non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) scans. Statistical analyses were performed using R software, with p < 0.05 considered significant.
resultsAfter propensity score matching, 226 patients per group were well-balanced across baseline characteristics (ASMD < 0.1). Group 1 was associated with shorter laser (p = 0.001) and operative times (p = 0.048), and more frequent use of larger sheaths (p < 0.001). Complication rates were low and comparable between groups. Group 1 achieved higher 100% stone free status (65.5% vs. 55.8%, p = 0.012), though overall stone-free rates were similar. Reintervention rates did not differ significantly. Lasing and exit strategy did not differ between the two groups. On multivariate analysis, single-use scope use (OR 1.659, p = 0.018) and 10-12 Fr UAS (OR 1.749, p = 0.043) were significantly associated with complete stone clearance.
conclusionOur study findings indicate that FANS is a safe and effective technique irrespective of the type of scope used. However, as FANS offers the potential to achieve a truly 100% stone-free status, this outcome is more likely when using single-use scopes in combination with 10/12 sheaths. Given that stone volume is a significant determinant of stone-free outcomes, surgeons may consider selecting the scope type to tailor the procedure according to stone complexity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40569462What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.