NCT05201599

Brief Summary

The aim of this trial is to compare the efficacy and safety of flexible ureteroscope with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure (FURL-ICP) and traditional flexible ureteroscope(f-URL) in the treatment of upper urinary stones ≤ 2cm in diameter. It is designed as a multicenter, parallel randomized controlled trial with two arms. At least 449 patients with upper urinary stones ≤ 2cm in diameter will be invited to participant in this study. Patients will be assigned to intervention group (FURL-ICP group) or control group (f-URL) by a simple random sampling technique with a rate of 1:1. The baseline of participants include demographic data, urine analysis, blood cell analysis, blood biochemical analysis, and urinary computer tomography (CT) with a slice thickness of 2mm. The primary outcomes are postoperative stone-free rate (SFR) of one month by CT scan and postoperative fever rate (body temperature \> 38.5 ℃ within 3 days after operation). Secondary outcomes include operating time, degree of ureteral injury, SFR of one day.

Trial Health

43
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
449

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Aug 2021

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
unknown

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

August 11, 2021

Completed
2 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

October 6, 2021

Completed
4 months until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

January 21, 2022

Completed
6 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

July 31, 2022

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

July 31, 2022

Completed
Last Updated

January 21, 2022

Status Verified

January 1, 2022

Enrollment Period

12 months

First QC Date

October 6, 2021

Last Update Submit

January 20, 2022

Conditions

Keywords

upper urinary stoneflexible ureteroscopevacuum suctionstone free rate

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Stone free rate for one month

    Stone free rate for one month after surgery by CT scan with a thickness of 2mm.

    One month after surgery

Secondary Outcomes (4)

  • Stone free rate for one day

    One day after surgery

  • Postoperative fever rate

    Within 3 days after operation

  • Operating time

    During the operation

  • Degree of ureteral injury

    During the operation

Study Arms (2)

Flexible ureteroscope with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure(FURL-ICP)

EXPERIMENTAL

Patients will be placed in supine lithotomy position with 60-90° oblique on the affected side upward. A pressure measuring ureteral access sheath (UAS) (11-14Fr) is inserted into the proximal ureter along the guidewire without fluoroscopic guidance. The pressure sensory and suctioning channels are connected to the irrigation and suctioning platform.

Device: Flexible ureteroscope with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure

Traditional flexible ureteroscope(f-URL)

NO INTERVENTION

Each procedure is completed under general anesthesia in lithotomy position. A semi-rigid ureteroscopy is used to place a 0.032-inch guidewire. A pressure measuring ureteral access sheath (UAS) (11-14Fr) is inserted into the proximal ureter along the guidewire without fluoroscopic guidance. The irrigation and suctioning platform will be not used. A 7.5 Fr flexible ureteroscopy is used to break the stone with a holmium laser (fiber diameter 200 µm). A basket is used to remove the stone fragments. A 4-6Fr ureteral stent is left for 2 weeks after the operation. Stone composition is analyzed. If the UAS is failed to be placed, ureteral stent will be placed for 2 weeks and a second stage traditional f-URL will be performed.

Interventions

After adjusting the UAS in suitable position, the pressure sensory and suctioning channels are connected to the irrigation and suctioning platform. After being injected with water, a zero calibration is performed for the pressure sensory system. A fully automatic mode is selected on the platform. The perfusion flow is set between 50 to 150 mL/min. The RPP control value is set between -15 to -5 mmHg. The renal pelvic pressure alarm value is set between 20 to 30mmHg. During the operation, a holmium laser is used to break stones into powder (fiber diameter 200 µm), and the flexible ureteroscopy is moved back and forward slightly to suck out the stone particles inside the sheath gap. Particles larger than the sheath gap but smaller than the UAS is sucked out by intermittently withdrawing the flexible ureteroscope without basket.

Flexible ureteroscope with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure(FURL-ICP)

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 70 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • The diameter of single stone or cumulative maximum diameter for multiple stones is less than or equal to 2cm
  • American Society of Anesthesiology scores of 1to 2
  • All patients participate in this study voluntarily and signed informed consent

You may not qualify if:

  • Uncontrolled urinary tract infection
  • Patients with pyonephrosis are found during operation
  • The patients with abnormal anatomy (heterotopic kidney, horseshoe kidney, duplicate kidney), ureteral stricture, urethral stricture and urinary diversion
  • Severe hydronephrosis
  • Renal function was decompensated (serum creatinine \> 178 μmol/L)
  • Severe systemic hemorrhagic disease
  • Patients who underwent bilateral surgery at the same time
  • Severe deformity of hip joint and difficult position

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

The Affiliated Ganzhou Hospital of Nanchang University (Ganzhou People's Hospital)

Ganzhou, Jiangxi, 341000, China

RECRUITING

Related Publications (19)

  • Zeng G, Mai Z, Xia S, Wang Z, Zhang K, Wang L, Long Y, Ma J, Li Y, Wan SP, Wu W, Liu Y, Cui Z, Zhao Z, Qin J, Zeng T, Liu Y, Duan X, Mai X, Yang Z, Kong Z, Zhang T, Cai C, Shao Y, Yue Z, Li S, Ding J, Tang S, Ye Z. Prevalence of kidney stones in China: an ultrasonography based cross-sectional study. BJU Int. 2017 Jul;120(1):109-116. doi: 10.1111/bju.13828. Epub 2017 Mar 21.

  • Moe OW. Kidney stones: pathophysiology and medical management. Lancet. 2006 Jan 28;367(9507):333-44. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68071-9.

  • Farhan M, Nazim SM, Salam B, Ather MH. Prospective evaluation of outcome of percutaneous nephrolithotomy using the 'STONE' nephrolithometry score: A single-centre experience. Arab J Urol. 2015 Dec;13(4):264-9. doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2015.07.006. Epub 2015 Aug 29.

  • Scales CD Jr, Smith AC, Hanley JM, Saigal CS; Urologic Diseases in America Project. Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol. 2012 Jul;62(1):160-5. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.052. Epub 2012 Mar 31.

  • Khan SR, Pearle MS, Robertson WG, Gambaro G, Canales BK, Doizi S, Traxer O, Tiselius HG. Kidney stones. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 Feb 25;2:16008. doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2016.8.

  • Trinchieri A, Ostini F, Nespoli R, Rovera F, Montanari E, Zanetti G. A prospective study of recurrence rate and risk factors for recurrence after a first renal stone. J Urol. 1999 Jul;162(1):27-30. doi: 10.1097/00005392-199907000-00007.

  • Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, Pace KT, Pais VM Jr, Pearle MS, Preminger GM, Razvi H, Shah O, Matlaga BR. Surgical Management of Stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, PART I. J Urol. 2016 Oct;196(4):1153-60. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.090. Epub 2016 May 27.

  • Guler Y, Erbin A, Ozmerdiven G, Yazici O. Comparison of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery and Laparoscopic Surgery in the Treatment of Proximal Ureteral and Renal Pelvic Stones Greater than 15 mm. Folia Med (Plovdiv). 2020 Sep 30;62(3):490-496. doi: 10.3897/folmed.62.e48934.

  • Resorlu B, Unsal A, Ziypak T, Diri A, Atis G, Guven S, Sancaktutar AA, Tepeler A, Bozkurt OF, Oztuna D. Comparison of retrograde intrarenal surgery, shockwave lithotripsy, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for treatment of medium-sized radiolucent renal stones. World J Urol. 2013 Dec;31(6):1581-6. doi: 10.1007/s00345-012-0991-1. Epub 2012 Nov 22.

  • Cvetkovic T, Kameric-Buljina M. [Comparative "in vitro" examination of permeability of rebasing made of phosphate cement and tubulitec aiming at chemical protection of dental pulp]. Stomatol Vjesn. 1986;15(1-2):23-7. No abstract available. Croatian.

  • Javanmard B, Kashi AH, Mazloomfard MM, Ansari Jafari A, Arefanian S. Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Stones Smaller Than 2 cm: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Urol J. 2016 Oct 10;13(5):2823-2828.

  • Hussain M, Acher P, Penev B, Cynk M. Redefining the limits of flexible ureterorenoscopy. J Endourol. 2011 Jan;25(1):45-9. doi: 10.1089/end.2010.0236. Epub 2010 Nov 4.

  • Karakoyunlu N, Goktug G, Sener NC, Zengin K, Nalbant I, Ozturk U, Ozok U, Imamoglu A. A comparison of standard PCNL and staged retrograde FURS in pelvis stones over 2 cm in diameter: a prospective randomized study. Urolithiasis. 2015 Jun;43(3):283-7. doi: 10.1007/s00240-015-0768-2. Epub 2015 Apr 3.

  • Akbulut F, Kucuktopcu O, Kandemir E, Sonmezay E, Simsek A, Ozgor F, Binbay M, Muslumanoglu AY, Gurbuz G. Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in treatment of lower calyceal stones smaller than 2 cm. Ren Fail. 2016;38(1):163-7. doi: 10.3109/0886022X.2015.1128792. Epub 2016 Jan 4.

  • Yanaral F, Ozgor F, Kucuktopcu O, Sarilar O, Ayranci A, Savun M, Yuksel B, Binbay M. Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscopy and Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Management of Multiple Renal Calculi in 10-30 mm Size. Urol J. 2019 Aug 18;16(4):326-330. doi: 10.22037/uj.v0i0.3310.

  • Saad KS, Youssif ME, Al Islam Nafis Hamdy S, Fahmy A, El Din Hanno AG, El-Nahas AR. Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy vs Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Large Renal Stones in Pediatric Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Urol. 2015 Dec;194(6):1716-20. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.06.101. Epub 2015 Jul 10.

  • Deng X, Song L, Xie D, Fan D, Zhu L, Yao L, Wang X, Liu S, Zhang Y, Liao X, Liu S, Peng Z, Hu M, Zhu X, Huang J, Liu T, Du C, Guo S, Yang Z, Peng G, Ye Z. A Novel Flexible Ureteroscopy with Intelligent Control of Renal Pelvic Pressure: An Initial Experience of 93 Cases. J Endourol. 2016 Oct;30(10):1067-1072. doi: 10.1089/end.2015.0770. Epub 2016 Sep 28.

  • Chen H, Qiu X, Du C, Xie D, Liu T, Wang G, Song L. The Comparison Study of Flexible Ureteroscopic Suctioning Lithotripsy With Intelligent Pressure Control Versus Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Suctioning Nephrolithotomy in Treating Renal Calculi of 2 to 3 cm in Size. Surg Innov. 2019 Oct;26(5):528-535. doi: 10.1177/1553350619849782. Epub 2019 May 26.

  • Deng X, Chen Y, Zhai Q, Song L, Du C, Tan W. Fluid absorption during flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent control of renal pelvic pressure: a randomized controlled trial. World J Urol. 2024 May 17;42(1):331. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05036-8.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Urinary Calculi

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

UrolithiasisUrologic DiseasesFemale Urogenital DiseasesFemale Urogenital Diseases and Pregnancy ComplicationsUrogenital DiseasesMale Urogenital DiseasesCalculiPathological Conditions, AnatomicalPathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Study Officials

  • Guohua Zeng, Doctor

    The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University

    STUDY CHAIR

Central Study Contacts

Zanlin Mai, Doctor

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: Patients with upper urinary stones ≤ 2cm in diameter will be assigned to intervention group (FURL-ICP group) or control group (f-URL) by a simple random sampling technique with a rate of 1:1.
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Professor

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

October 6, 2021

First Posted

January 21, 2022

Study Start

August 11, 2021

Primary Completion

July 31, 2022

Study Completion

July 31, 2022

Last Updated

January 21, 2022

Record last verified: 2022-01

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

When the study is finished, we will shared data with other researchers.

Available IPD Datasets

Study Protocol (zxt4)Access

Locations