Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ureteroscopy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Clinical Management of Urolithiasis

  • 1155 Accesses

Abstract

Ureteroscopy has evolved from an incidental evaluation of the ureter by Hugh Hampton Young in the early 1900s to what many experts consider to be the standard of care in the therapy for minimal to moderate urologic stone burden. Ureteroscopy has a wide range of clinical indications and applications and is considered essential for patients in whom other stone treatment modalities are contraindicated (e.g., pregnancy, systemic anticoagulation, morbid obesity). Stone size and renal anatomic factors are the primary predictors of stone-free success, and associated complications, while rare and often manageable by endoscopic means, can result in significant morbidity to the patient. Technological advances in the optical quality of ureteroscopes in addition to the fragmenting and grasping capabilities of lithotrites and stone retrieval devices, respectively, have vastly enhanced the endourologist’s ability to treat stones of all shapes, sizes, and locations. Postprocedural ureteral stent placement remains controversial but is requisite when a ureteral access sheath is employed. Selective postoperative imaging is reasonable following uncomplicated procedures to reduce both healthcare costs and radiation exposure to the patient.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adiyat KT, Meuleners R, Monga M (2009) Selective postoperative imaging after ureteroscopy. Urology 73(3):490–493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Alapont JM, Broseta E, Oliver F et al (2003) Ureteral avulsion as a complication of ureteroscopy. Int Braz J Urol 29(1):18–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beddingfield R, Pedro RN, Hinck B et al (2009) Alfuzosin to relieve ureteral stent discomfort: a prospective, randomized, placebo controlled study. J Urol 181(1):170–176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Biyani CS, Joyce AD (2002) Urolithiasis in pregnancy. I: pathophysiology, fetal considerations and diagnosis. BJU Int 89(8):811–818

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bozkurt OF, Resorlu B, Yildiz Y et al (2011) Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of lower-pole renal stones with a diameter of 15 to 20 mm. J Endourol 25(7):1131–1135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butler MR, Power RE, Thornhill JA et al (2004) An audit of 2,273 ureteroscopies–a focus on intra-operative complications to justify proactive management of ureteric calculi. Surgeon 2(1):42–46

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Calvano CT, Moran ME, White MD et al (1999) Experimental utilization of the holmium laser in a model of ureteroscopic lithotripsy: energy analysis. J Endourol 13(2):113–115

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chu L, Farris CA, Corcoran AT et al (2011a) Preoperative stent placement decreases cost of ureteroscopy. Urology 78(2):309–313

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chu L, Sternberg KM, Averch TD (2011b) Preoperative stenting decreases operative time and reoperative rates of ureteroscopy. J Endourol 25(5):751–754

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coe FL, Parks JH, Lindheimer MD (1978) Nephrolithiasis during pregnancy. N Engl J Med 298(6):324–326

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Delvecchio FC, Auge BK, Brizuela RM et al (2003) Assessment of stricture formation with the ureteral access sheath. Urology 61:518–522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dickstein RJ, Kreshover JE, Babayan RK et al (2010) Is a safety wire necessary during routine flexible ureteroscopy. J Endourol 24(10):1589–1592

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eandi J, Hu B, Low RK (2008) Evaluation of the impact and need for use of a safety guidewire during ureteroscopy. J Endourol 22(8):1653–1658

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gdor Y, Faddegon S, Krambeck AE et al (2011) Multi-institutional assessment of ureteroscopic laser papillotomy for chronic flank pain associated with papillary calcifications. J Urol 185(1):192–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gertner JM, Coustan DR, Kliger AS et al (1986) Pregnancy as state of physiologic absorptive hypercalciuria. Am J Med 81(3):451–456

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Grasso M, Lang G, Loisides P et al (1995) Endoscopic management of the symptomatic caliceal diverticular calculus. J Urol 153(6):1878–1881

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haberman K, Ortiz-Alvarado O, Chotikawanich E et al (2011) A dual-channel flexible ureteroscope: evaluation of deflection, flow, illumination, and optics. J Endourol 25(9):1411–1414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hendlin K, Weiland D, Monga M (2008) Impact of irrigation systems on stone migration. J Endourol 22(3):453–458

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain M, Acher P, Penev B et al (2011) Redefining the limits of flexible ureterorenoscopy. J Endourol 25(1):45–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jeon SS, Hyun JH, Lee KS (2005) A comparison of holmium:YAG laser with Lithoclast lithotripsy in ureteral calculi fragmentation. Int J Urol 12(6):544–547

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kourambas J, Byrine RR, Preminger GM (2001) Does a ureteral access sheath facilitate ureteroscopy? J Urol 165(3):789–793

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Krambeck AE, Murat FJ, Gettman MT et al (2006) The evolution of ureteroscopy: a modern single-institution series. Mayo Clin Proc 81(4):468–473

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo RL, Aslan P, Zhong P et al (1998) Impact of holmium laser settings and fiber diameter on stone fragmentation and endoscope deflection. J Endourol 12(6):523–527

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo RL, Lingeman JE, Leveillee RJ et al (2003) A randomized clinical trial of ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lower pole stones between 11 and 25 mm. J Endourol 17:A31

    Google Scholar 

  • L’esperance JO, Ekeruo WO, Scales C et al (2005) Effect of ureteral access sheath on stone-free rates in patients undergoing ureteroscopic management of renal calculi. J Urol 66(2):252–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landman J, Kenkatesh R, Ragab M et al (2002) Comparison of intrarenal pressure and irrigant flow during percutaneous nephroscopy with an indwelling catheter, ureteral occlusion balloon, and ureteral access sheath. Urology 60(4):584–587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lingeman JE, Siegel YI, Steele B et al (1994) Management of lower pole nephrolithiasis: a critical analysis. J Urol 151(3):663–667

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lotan Y, Gettman MT, Roehrborn CG et al (2002) Management of ureteral calculi: a cost comparison and decision making analysis. J Urol 167(4):1621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Monga M, Weiland D, Pedro RN, Lynch AC, Anderson K (2007) Intrarenal manipulation of flexible ureteroscopes: a comparative study. BJU Int 100(1):157–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nabi G, Downey P, Keeley F, et al (2007) Extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) versus ureteroscopic management for ureteric calculi. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 24(1):CD006029. Review

    Google Scholar 

  • Paffen ML, Keizer JG, de Winter GV et al (2008) A comparison of the physical properties of four new generation flexible ureteroscopes: (de)flection, flow properties, torsion stiffness, and optical characteristics. J Endourol 22(10):2227–2234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pearle MS, Lingeman JE, Leveillee R et al (2005) Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less. J Urol 173(6):2005–2009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pedro RN, Hendlin K, Durfee WK et al (2007a) Physical characteristics of next-generation ureteral access sheaths: buckling and kinking. Urology 70(3):440–442

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pedro RN, Hendlin K, Weiland D et al (2007b) In vitro evaluation of ureteral perforation forces. Urology 70(3):592–594

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pietrow PK, Auge BK, Delvecchio FC et al (2002) Techniques to maximize flexible ureteroscope longevity. Urology 60(5):784–788

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Preminger G, Tiselius H, Assimos D, et al (2007) EAU/AUA nephrolithiasis guideline panel: 2007 guideline for the management of ureteral calculi. http://www.auanet.org/content/clinical-practice-guidelines/clinical-guidelines.cfm?sub=uc. Accessed 10 Oct 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport D, Perks AE, Teichman JM (2007) Ureteral access sheath use and stenting in ureteroscopy: effect on unplanned emergency room visits and cost. J Endourol 21(9):993–997

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts WW, Cadeddu JA, Micali S et al (1998) Ureteral stricture formation after removal of impacted calculi. J Urol 159(3):723–726

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salem HK (2009) A prospective randomized study comparing shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi. Urology 74(6):1216–1221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster TG, Hollenbeck BK, Faerber GJ et al (2001) Complications of ureteroscopy: analysis of predictive factors. J Urol 166(2):538–540

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schuster TG, Hollenbeck BK, Faerber GJ et al (2002) Ureteroscopic treatment of lower pole calculi: comparison of lithotripsy in situ and after displacement. J Urol 168(1):43–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Seitz C, Tanovic E, Kikic Z et al (2007) Impact of stone size, location, composition, impaction, and hydronephrosis on the efficacy of holmium:YAG-laser ureterolithotripsy. Eur Urol 52(6):1751–1757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Semins MJ, Trock BJ, Matlaga BR (2009) The safety of ureteroscopy during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 181(1):139–143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spore SS, Teichman JM, Corbin NS et al (1999) Holmium: YAG lithotripsy: optimal power settings. J Endourol 13(8):559–566

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Symons SJ, Ramachandran A, Kurien A et al (2008) Urolithiasis in the horseshoe kidney: a single-centre experience. BJU Int 102(11):1676–1680

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tang L, Gao X, Xu B et al (2011) Placement of ureteral stent after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: Do we really need it? Urology 78:1248–1256

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Teichman JM, Rao RD, Rogenes VJ et al (1997) Ureteroscopic management of ureteral calculi: electrohydraulic versus holmium:YAG lithotripsy. J Urol 158(4):1357–1361

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Traxer O, Geavlete B, de Medina SG et al (2011) Narrow-band imaging digital flexible ureteroscopy in detection of upper urinary tract transitional-cell carcinoma: initial experience. J Endourol 25(1):19–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watterson JD, Girvan AR, Cook AJ et al (2002) Safety and efficacy of holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy in patients with bleeding diatheses. J Urol 168(2):442–445

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weizer AZ, Springhart WP, Ekeruo WO et al (2005) Ureteroscopic management of renal calculi in anomalous kidneys. Urology 65(2):265–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yakoubi R, Lemdani M, Monga M et al (2011) Is there a role for α-blockers in ureteral stent related symptoms? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Urol 86(3):928–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young HM, McKay RW (1929) Congenital valvular obstruction of the prostatic urethra. Surg Gynecol Obstet 48:509

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue/Q10, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    Brandon K. Isariyawongse M.D.

  2. Department of Urology, Stevan B. Streem Center for Endourology and Stone Disease, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Avenue/Q10, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA

    Manoj Monga M.D., FACS

Authors
  1. Brandon K. Isariyawongse M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manoj Monga M.D., FACS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manoj Monga M.D., FACS .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Urologie, Klinikum Sindelfingen-Böblingen, Arthur-Gruber-Str. 70, Sindelfingen, 71065, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

    Thomas Knoll

  2. Center, Department of Urology, UT Southwestern Medical, 5323 Harry Hines, Blvd, Dallas, 75390, Texas, USA

    Margaret S. Pearle

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Isariyawongse, B.K., Monga, M. (2013). Ureteroscopy. In: Knoll, T., Pearle, M. (eds) Clinical Management of Urolithiasis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28732-9_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28732-9_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-28731-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-28732-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation