Impact Ureteral Sheath Design During Ureteroscopy

Urolithiasis Clinical Trial

Official title:

The Impact of Ureteral Access Sheath Design on Ease of Placement and Ureteral Wall Injury During Flexible Ureteroscopy

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03349099
• Other study ID #: 14-632
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• First received: November 13, 2017
• Last updated: December 21, 2017
• Start date: June 27, 2014
• Est. completion date: July 2016

Study information

• Verified date: December 2017
• Source: The Cleveland Clinic
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

The purpose of this study is to assess whether one of two ureteral access sheaths is safer for patients undergoing ureteroscopy. Both sheaths are FDA approved devices and commercially available. The investigators will compare the ability of sheaths to access the kidney through the ureter and will compare damage done to the ureter after completion of the procedure. Access sheaths are standard of care for this procedure; this study seeks to optimize outcomes for patients.

Patients undergoing ureteroscopy who do not have ureteral stents in place and who have not had an ipsilateral procedure within 90 days will be recruited and consented.

Description:

The purpose of this study is to compare two ureteral access sheaths in how the sheaths damage the ureter during flexible ureteroscopy.

Condition Intervention Kidney Stones Nephrolithiasis Urolithiasis Device: Cook Flexor or Boston Scientific Navigator HD

Study Type: Interventional Study Design: Intervention Model: Two group randomized assignment Masking: Single blind Primary Purpose: Treatment

Primary Outcome Measures:

• Successful placement of sheath (yes or no).

Secondary Outcome Measures:

• Subjective rating of damage to ureter. At the completion of the procedure, video of the intraluminal ureter is recorded as the sheath is withdrawn. Videos are analyzed by two blinded staff endourologists to score ureteral injury on a standard 5-point scale (0 to 4); reference Traxer and Thomas.

• Ease of placement of each sheath. Surgeons will be asked to subjectively rate the ease of placement on a standardized scale from 0 to 4, 4 being easiest which will be rated by the surgeon who inserted the sheath immediately after placement.

Arms Assigned Interventions Device: Cook Flexor and Boston Scientific Navigator HD Device:

Cook Flexor or Boston Scientific Navigator HD Patients will be assigned to one of two ureteral access sheaths. If the first sheath is failed to be placed, the backup sheath will be attempted.

Standard ureteroscopy will take place. The intervention takes place before the ureteral access sheath is placed. The patient will be randomized to one of the two sheaths. The randomized 12/14Fr sheath will be attempted. If placed successfully, the rest of the operation continues as planned. If the initial sheath is unable to be placed, a second backup sheath (opposite brand) will be used, also in size 12/14Fr. The surgeon will be asked to rate the ease of placement of the sheath on a standardized scale. If these sheaths fail, it is the surgeon's discretion to continue with the smaller sheath, continue without sheath or place stents and attempt the procedure at a later date. The operation is then continued in standard fashion. Once the ureteroscopy is completed, before the scope and access sheath are removed, video recording of the ureter will be conducted as the ureteroscopy and sheath are removed.

Videos will be analyzed by blinded urologists who will rate the extent of ureteral damage on a standardized scale of 0 to 4 according to the study published by Traxer et al. 2013. Intra-operative data includes total time of initial sheath insertion (in seconds), total time sheath is in place (minutes) from placement to removal, and use of laser. Differences in operative time, ease of placement, ability to maintain access, and ease of instrument passage are also evaluated between devices, as well as success rates, and device failure rates and post-operative complications. Means are compared using a t-test and proportions are compared using a chi-squared test. An intention to treat model is used for statistical analysis. When video ratings differ between surgeons, the higher rating of damage will be used. Inter-rater reliability is assessed with Cohen's kappa coefficient.

After the study, subjects will not be contacted. The investigators will collect data from participants' medical records including information of whether participants develop complications or return for a subsequent procedure as well as size and location of kidney stones prior to the surgery.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 95
• Est. completion date: July 2016
• Est. primary completion date: July 2016
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients planned for ureteroscopy

• Current CT scan within 90-days before the operation

• Able to give informed consent

• Ages 18 years and older

Exclusion Criteria:

• Inability to give informed consent

• Age less than 18 years

• Pregnant

• Stones in the ureter

• Having previous ipsilateral ureteral or renal surgery within 90 days

• Having stents placed in ipsilateral ureter within 90 days

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Kidney Calculi
• Nephrolithiasis
• Renal Stone
• Urolithiasis

Intervention

Device:
• Cook Flexor
ureteral access sheath
• Boston Scientific Navigator
ureteral access sheath

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
n/a

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
The Cleveland Clinic

References & Publications (12)

Auge BK, Pietrow PK, Lallas CD, Raj GV, Santa-Cruz RW, Preminger GM. Ureteral access sheath provides protection against elevated renal pressures during routine flexible ureteroscopic stone manipulation. J Endourol. 2004 Feb;18(1):33-6. — View Citation

Ayyathurai R, Kanagarajah P, Shields J, Young E, Alvarez A, Bird VG. Single-center clinical comparison of two reinforced ureteral access sheaths for retrograde ureteroscopic treatment of urinary lithiasis. Int Urol Nephrol. 2012 Apr;44(2):409-14. doi: 10.1007/s11255-011-0017-8. Epub 2011 Jun 25. — View Citation

De S, Sarkissian C, Torricelli FC, Brown R, Monga M. New ureteral access sheaths: a double standard. Urology. 2015 Apr;85(4):757-63. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.07.009. Epub 2015 Feb 4. — View Citation

Delvecchio FC, Auge BK, Brizuela RM, Weizer AZ, Silverstein AD, Lallas CD, Pietrow PK, Albala DM, Preminger GM. Assessment of stricture formation with the ureteral access sheath. Urology. 2003 Mar;61(3):518-22; discussion 522. — View Citation

Fuganti PE, Pires S, Branco R, Porto J. Predictive factors for intraoperative complications in semirigid ureteroscopy: analysis of 1235 ballistic ureterolithotripsies. Urology. 2008 Oct;72(4):770-4. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.05.042. Epub 2008 Jul 16. — View Citation

Kourambas J, Byrne RR, Preminger GM. Does a ureteral access sheath facilitate ureteroscopy? J Urol. 2001 Mar;165(3):789-93. — View Citation

Lallas CD, Auge BK, Raj GV, Santa-Cruz R, Madden JF, Preminger GM. Laser Doppler flowmetric determination of ureteral blood flow after ureteral access sheath placement. J Endourol. 2002 Oct;16(8):583-90. — View Citation

Mogilevkin Y, Sofer M, Margel D, Greenstein A, Lifshitz D. Predicting an effective ureteral access sheath insertion: a bicenter prospective study. J Endourol. 2014 Dec;28(12):1414-7. doi: 10.1089/end.2014.0215. — View Citation

Pietrow PK, Auge BK, Delvecchio FC, Silverstein AD, Weizer AZ, Albala DM, Preminger GM. Techniques to maximize flexible ureteroscope longevity. Urology. 2002 Nov;60(5):784-8. — View Citation

Rehman J, Monga M, Landman J, Lee DI, Felfela T, Conradie MC, Srinivas R, Sundaram CP, Clayman RV. Characterization of intrapelvic pressure during ureteropyeloscopy with ureteral access sheaths. Urology. 2003 Apr;61(4):713-8. — View Citation

Schoenthaler M, Wilhelm K, Kuehhas FE, Farin E, Bach C, Buchholz N, Miernik A. Postureteroscopic lesion scale: a new management modified organ injury scale--evaluation in 435 ureteroscopic patients. J Endourol. 2012 Nov;26(11):1425-30. doi: 10.1089/end.2012.0227. Epub 2012 Aug 27. — View Citation

Traxer O, Thomas A. Prospective evaluation and classification of ureteral wall injuries resulting from insertion of a ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery. J Urol. 2013 Feb;189(2):580-4. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.197. Epub 2012 Oct 8. — View Citation

* Note: There are 12 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Number of Participants With Successful Sheath Placement	The surgeon documents whether there was Successful placement of sheath (yes or no)	One time point - at the beginning of the procedure
Secondary	Number of Participants With Injury to the Ureter	Subjective rating of damage to ureter. At the completion of the procedure, video of the intraluminal ureter is recorded as the sheath is withdrawn. Videos are analyzed by two blinded staff endourologists who score ureteral injury on a standard 5-point scale (0 to 4); reference Traxer and Thomas.	One time point - at the completion of the procedure
Secondary	Ease of Sheath Placement	Surgeons will be asked to subjectively rate the ease of placement on a standardized scale from 0 to 4, 4 being easiest which will be rated by the surgeon who inserted the sheath immediately after placement.	One time point - at the completion of the procedure