Safety and efficacy of using traditional ureteral access sheath versus flexible and navigable suction sheath in retrograde intra-renal stone surgery for renal stones ≤ 20 mm: A randomized controlled study

Objectives To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Flexible and Navigable Suction Sheath (FANS) in comparison with the traditional ureteral access sheath (T-UAS) during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for cases with a single renal stone ≤ 20 mm.Methods A total of 140 cases presenting with single renal stones ≤ 20 mm were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either treatment in FANS group or T-UAS group. The primary endpoint was clinically acceptable stone-free status, defined as residual fragments ≤ 4 mm on 1-month non-contrast computed tomography. True stone-free status, defined as no residual fragments, was analyzed as a secondary endpoint, together with operative time and postoperative complications.Results Baseline characteristics and mean stone size were comparable between both groups (14.8 ± 3.0 in FANS vs. 15.40 ± 3.20 in traditional group). Clinically acceptable stone-free status at 1 month did not substantially differ between FANS and T-UAS groups (82.9% vs. 77.1%; p = 0.398). True stone-free status was also comparable between groups (77.1% vs. 71.4%; p = 0.742). Operative time was comparable between groups (52 ± 7 in FANS group vs. 54 ± 12 min in T-UAS group; p = 0.102). Postoperative complications were comparable between FANS and T-UAS groups (11.4% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.614). Although FANS demonstrated a numerically higher SFR and fewer secondary procedures, these variations were not statistically significant.Conclusions In patients undergoing RIRS for single renal stones ≤ 20 mm, FANS did not demonstrate superiority over T-UAS in terms of stone-free rate, operative time, or complication rates. While FANS remains a safe and feasible technique, its incremental clinical benefit in low stone burden appears limited.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Arab Journal of Urology
Published
2026-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/20905998.2026.2690819
Primary Topic
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Safety and efficacy of using traditional ureteral access sheath versus flexible and navigable suction sheath in retrograde intra-renal stone surgery for renal stones ≤ 20 mm: A randomized controlled study

Mohamed Samir, Ahmed Higazy, Hassan Mahmoud Hassan Abd El Ghany, Ashraf M. Satour
Arab Journal of Urology
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
article

Safety and efficacy of using traditional ureteral access sheath versus flexible and navigable suction sheath in retrograde intra-renal stone surgery for renal stones ≤ 20 mm: A randomized controlled study

Mohamed Samir, Ahmed Higazy, Hassan Mahmoud Hassan Abd El Ghany, Ashraf M. Satour
article en

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Flexible and Navigable Suction Sheath (FANS) in comparison with the traditional ureteral access sheath (T-UAS) during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for cases with a single renal stone ≤ 20 mm.Methods A total of 140 cases presenting with single renal stones ≤ 20 mm were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either treatment in FANS group or T-UAS group. The primary endpoint was clinically acceptable stone-free status, defined as residual fragments ≤ 4 mm on 1-month non-contrast computed tomography. True stone-free status, defined as no residual fragments, was analyzed as a secondary endpoint, together with operative time and postoperative complications.Results Baseline characteristics and mean stone size were comparable between both groups (14.8 ± 3.0 in FANS vs. 15.40 ± 3.20 in traditional group). Clinically acceptable stone-free status at 1 month did not substantially differ between FANS and T-UAS groups (82.9% vs. 77.1%; p = 0.398). True stone-free status was also comparable between groups (77.1% vs. 71.4%; p = 0.742). Operative time was comparable between groups (52 ± 7 in FANS group vs. 54 ± 12 min in T-UAS group; p = 0.102). Postoperative complications were comparable between FANS and T-UAS groups (11.4% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.614). Although FANS demonstrated a numerically higher SFR and fewer secondary procedures, these variations were not statistically significant.Conclusions In patients undergoing RIRS for single renal stones ≤ 20 mm, FANS did not demonstrate superiority over T-UAS in terms of stone-free rate, operative time, or complication rates. While FANS remains a safe and feasible technique, its incremental clinical benefit in low stone burden appears limited.

Arab Journal of Urology
Ain Shams University (EG)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.