Advertisement

Retrograde Intra-Renal Surgery (RIRS)

  • Deok Hyun HanEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) has markedly evolved and now plays an important role in the first-line treatment of renal calculi of less than 20 mm. RIRS is a delicate operation that uses a lot of miniaturized instruments including flexible ureterorenoscope (FURS). Understanding characteristics of instruments and surgical techniques is important for safe and effective operation. A variety of FURS is on the market and has various functional distinctions. Image transfer technology, number of working channel, and durability are important issues for proper selection of FURS. There is a learning curve to be familiarized with FURS. Understanding basic principles of FURS manipulation will shorten the learning time and reduce the maintenance cost of FURS. Currently, three stone-breaking methods are widely used. Fragmentation with basketing is optimal in the treatment of small hard stones. Dusting makes large stones to tiny pieces by low pulse power laser. It eliminates the necessity of stone basket use. Stone debris that is not suitable for basketing or dusting can be treated by popcorn method that utilizes whirlpool phenomenon. Various combination of stone breaking/removal strategy may be applied to achieve good surgical outcomes.

Keywords

Retrograde intrarenal surgery Urinary stone Flexible ureterorenoscopy Renal stone Ureteroscopy Flexible Laser 

References

  1. Auge BK, Pietrow PK, Lallas CD, Raj GV, Santa-Cruz RW, Preminger GM. Ureteral access sheath provides protection against elevated renal pressures during routine flexible ureteroscopic stone manipulation. J Endourol. 2004;18(1):33–6.  https://doi.org/10.1089/089277904322836631.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Borin JF, Abdelshehid CS, Clayman RV. Comparison of resolution, contrast, and color differentiation among fiberoptic and digital flexible cystoscopes. J Endourol. 2006;20(1):54–8.  https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2006.20.54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Chapman RA, Somani BK, Robertson A, Healy S, Kata SG. Decreasing cost of flexible ureterorenoscopy: single-use laser fiber cost analysis. Urology. 2014;83(5):1003–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2013.12.019.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Emiliani E, Traxer O. Single use and disposable flexible ureteroscopes. Curr Opin Urol. 2017;27(2):176–81.  https://doi.org/10.1097/mou.0000000000000371.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Haberman K, Ortiz-Alvarado O, Chotikawanich E, Monga M. A dual-channel flexible ureteroscope: evaluation of deflection, flow, illumination, and optics. J Endourol. 2011;25(9):1411–4.  https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2010.0642.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Han DH, Jeon SH. Stone-breaking and retrieval strategy during retrograde intrarenal surgery. Investig Clin Urol. 2016;57(4):229–30.  https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2016.57.4.229.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Marshall VF. Fiber optics in urology. J Urol. 1964;91:110–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Paffen ML, Keizer JG, de Winter GV, Arends AJ, Hendrikx AJ. A comparison of the physical properties of four new generation flexible ureteroscopes: (de)flection, flow properties, torsion stiffness, and optical characteristics. J Endourol. 2008;22(10):2227–34.  https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2008.0371.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Quayle SS, Ames CD, Lieber D, Yan Y, Landman J. Comparison of optical resolution with digital and standard fiberoptic cystoscopes in an in vitro model. Urology. 2005;66(3):489–93.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2005.04.009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Rassweiler J, Rassweiler MC, Klein J. New technology in ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Curr Opin Urol. 2016;26(1):95–106.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000240.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Rehman J, Monga M, Landman J, Lee DI, Felfela T, Conradie MC, Srinivas R, Sundaram CP, Clayman RV. Characterization of intrapelvic pressure during ureteropyeloscopy with ureteral access sheaths. Urology. 2003;61(4):713–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Traxer O, Thomas A. Prospective evaluation and classification of ureteral wall injuries resulting from insertion of a ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery. J Urol. 2013;189(2):580–4.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.197.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Turk C, Petrik A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Knoll T. EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol. 2016;69(3):475–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Usawachintachit M, Isaacson DS, Taguchi K, Tzou DT, Hsi RS, Sherer BA, Stoller ML, Chi T. A prospective case-control study comparing lithovue, a single-use, flexible disposable ureteroscope, with flexible, reusable fiber-optic ureteroscopes. J Endourol. 2017;31(5):468–75.  https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0027.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Urology, Samsung Medical CenterSungkyunkwan University School of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations