Cabo, Jackson

Introduction: Ureteral stones are a common cause of emergency presentations. Definitive stone removal at the index encounter can reduce delays and repeat interventions. It is unknown whether fellowship-trained endourologists are more likely to perform definitive management than general/other subspecialist urologists. This multicenter retrospective cohort study evaluated the influence of endourology subspecialty training on the choice between upfront definitive stone treatment and initial ureteral decompression at first presentation. Patients managed with medical expulsive therapy alone were not included. Methods: Adults (≥18 years) presenting at 2022 to seven North American academic centers with symptomatic, noninfected, computed tomography-confirmed ureteral stones were included. Patients with infection, sepsis, positive nitrites, or intraoperative pyelonephritis were excluded from the study. Variables included demographics, stone size and location, subspecialty of the on-call urologist, and management type (definitive [ureteroscopy or shockwave lithotripsy] vs deferred [(initial stent]). Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify the predictors of definitive treatment. Results: Among the 395 patients, 190 (48.0%) underwent definitive management and 205 (52.0%) underwent deferred treatment. Distal stones were treated definitively more often than proximal stones were (51.1% vs 36.6%). An endourologist was on call for 150 encounters (38.0%); 64.7% of these patients received definitive treatment, compared with 38.0% under general/other subspecialist urologists. On multivariate analysis, endourologist on-call remained independently associated with definitive management (odds ratio [OR] 3.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.19–5.47, p < 0.0001), as did distal stone location (OR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.21–5.00, p = 0.013). Severe complications are rare, and none of the patients developed sepsis. Conclusions: Endourologists were more than three times more likely to perform definitive interventions for symptomatic, noninfected ureteral stones at initial presentation. Subspecialty expertise and timely operative access enable safe, efficient, single-stage management.

Introduction: Ureteroscopy (URS) is the most commonly performed surgery for the management of renal stones. Post-URS sepsis has been reported to be around 5%, but most studies rely on purchased datasets or electronic medical record (EMR) data that pull data based on billing codes of sepsis without clinical verifications. This study aims to evaluate the true incidence of sepsis using the Sepsis-3 criteria at a single tertiary care institution. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on all URS procedures at a single tertiary care institution from 2021 to 2022, including both Medicare and private insurance patients ≥18 years old. The EMR was queried for URS procedure codes and readmission within 30 days post-procedure with a sepsis diagnosis code. All other procedures, including URS during percutaneous nephrolithotomy, were excluded. Each identified case was evaluated for sepsis using the Sepsis-3 criteria, including sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) and quick SOFA (qSOFA). Results: A total of 1316 patients underwent URS. Nineteen patients were identified with a sepsis diagnosis, giving an initial post-URS sepsis rate of 1.44%. After EMR verification, 5 patients were excluded, leaving 14 (1.06%) patients with a diagnosis code of sepsis. Using Sepsis-3 criteria, only 6 (0.44%) met the diagnosis. Conclusions: This retrospective review identified only 0.44% of patients with a true post-URS sepsis within 30 days using Sepsis-3 criteria. The difference in our rate from the initial query and current literature highlights the need for accurate clinical diagnosis and documentation of sepsis.

Purpose: To compare stone clearance, stone-free status, and complications between patients undergoing ureteroscopy for renal stones using either Flexible and Navigable Ureteral Access Sheath (FANS) or the CVAC 2.0 system. Materials and Methods: A prospective study was completed on patients undergoing flexible ureteroscopy for renal stones at a single institution from March 2024 to December 2024. Subject demographics, intra-op data, volumetric and single-dimension stone clearance on non-contrast CT, and complications were compared. Stone-free rates (SFRs) using standardized cutoffs were compared. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to assess the relationship between preoperative stone volume and postoperative stone burden. Subanalysis was performed for patients with preoperative stone burden >1.5 cm. Results: A total of 123 cases (CVAC 2.0-36, FANS-87) were included, with 64 eligible for volumetric analysis. Preoperative stone volume was larger in the CVAC group vs FANS (1075 mm 3 vs 397 mm 3 ; p < 0.001). Absolute stone clearance was greater in the CVAC group (1016 mm 3 vs 392 mm 3 ; p < 0.001), whereas residual stone volume (4.1 mm 3 vs 15.0 mm 3 ; p = 0.55) and SFRs (90% vs 81%; p = 0.48) were similar. In individuals with >1.5 cm preoperative stone burden, relative stone clearance was greater with CVAC 2.0 (98.9% vs 95.1%; p = 0.026). Pearson correlation analysis revealed positive linear relationship between preoperative stone volume and residual stone volume for FANS, but not for CVAC 2.0. Conclusions: In this comparative study of FANS and CVAC 2.0, over 95% stone clearance was observed in both groups despite large initial stone burdens. In contrast to FANS, residual stone volumes with CVAC 2.0 did not increase significantly with increasing preoperative stone volumes.

Background: The assessment of surgical competency is essential for clinical training and safety. No objective, real-time tools exist to evaluate competency during endoscopic stone operation. We sought to apply endoscopic computer vision models to define automated performance metrics (APMs) from videos of flexible ureteroscopy. Materials and Methods: We assessed three APMs for endoscopic treatment of kidney stones, including percentage of frames without stone visibility, screen occupancy by stone, and frame-to-frame change in stone occupancy. Surgical videos of a surgeon performing either stone localization or stone ablation were recorded. Using our previously validated computer vision model for endoscopic stone segmentation, APMs were compared between experts (fellowship-trained endourologists) and trainees. Results: Forty-six videos, including 28 of stone localization and 18 of stone laser ablation, were analyzed from nine surgeons (three experts and six trainees). During stone localization, trainee videos had a higher percentage of frames without visible stone (4% vs 27%, p < 0.01) and lower screen occupancy by stone (5% vs 14%, p = 0.03) compared with expert videos. During laser ablation, trainee videos had a higher frame-to-frame change in stone occupancy (3% vs 2%, p < 0.01) compared with expert videos. Conclusions: APMs from computer vision methods differ between expert and trainee surgical videos of endoscopic kidney stone treatment. These metrics could be used to objectively assess skill evaluation and acquisition.