Understanding failures in getting it up: The prevalence and predictors of failed ureteral access in ureteroscopy
Introduction: Failed access ureteroscopy (FA) describes the inability to gain adequate access to a stone to allow for treatment. The purpose of this study was to identify the prevalence of, and factors predicting FA in patients presenting with renal and ureteral stones.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of all ureteroscopy (URS) procedures performed for renal and ureteral stones by three endourologists over a six-month period at our center. All patients who underwent URS for the purpose of stone treatment were included. Patients were excluded if they underwent URS for non-stone diagnosis or treatment. FA was investigated in relation to demographics, medical history, stone-specific characteristics, procedure-specific characteristics, etc. Statistical analysis consisted of descriptive statistics, as well as Chi-squared and t-test analysis using SPSS statistical software version 24.0.
Results: A total of 188 cases were reviewed, with 8% of patients experiencing FA. Patient age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, emergency cases, previous stone treatment, use of computed tomography (CT) imaging, presence of hydronephrosis, and surgeon did not differ significantly between FA and successful access (SA) groups. Stone size (9.88±5.8 vs. 8.76±4.3 mm; p=0.361) was also not significantly different. However, a significant difference was noted in time from first diagnosis to URS (128 vs. 65 days, p=0.044) between the FA and SA groups, respectively. Similarly, for ureteral stones, the FA group had a significantly greater proportion of stones located in the proximal ureter (62.5% vs. 22.0%, p=0.043).
Conclusions: Proximal ureteric stones were more likely to result in FA URS, and FA procedures were more likely to be preceded by extended time from first diagnosis to URS. Further investigation is necessary, and all endourology centers should track their own personal outcome data to allow for more meaningful analysis to be performed to improve patient outcomes.
You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:
- Post the Article on any Web site
- Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
- Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
- Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.
The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.
You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.
The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:
- That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
- That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
- That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
- That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.