Evidence Hub

Flexible negative pressure suction ureteral access sheath combined with ureteroscopy in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi: A meta-analysis

Huanglin Duan, Baisheng Xu, Tianpeng Xie

Medicine, 2025

1,769 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Background: Upper urinary tract stones are common diseases in urology. Ureteroscopic lithotripsy is one of the main methods for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones. With the rise of flexible urinary tract examination (F-UAS), it makes surgery safer and more effective. This study aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of flexible ureteral access sheath and traditional ureteral access sheath when used with ureteroscopic lithotripsy for treating upper urinary tract stones. Methods: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, cochrane library, scopus, and web of science databases for studies that evaluated the use of F-UAS in treating upper urinary tract stones. The outcome measures assessed in this study included operation time, immediate stone-free rate (SFR), 1-month postoperative follow-up SFR, postoperative complication rate, postoperative fever rate, and hospital stay after surgery. Results: This study included 9 studies involving 1769 patients, with 907 in the experimental group and 862 in the control group. The meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in operation time between the experimental and control groups (MD = 4.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −2.41 to 11.86, P = .19). The experimental group demonstrated higher immediate SFR (OR = 3.84, 95% CI: 1.56–9.42, P = .003) and postoperative follow-up SFR (OR = 2.60, 95% CI: 1.61–4.20, P < .0001). Additionally, the incidence of postoperative complications was lower in the experimental…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,769 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free