Urology
Volume 73, Issue 2 , Pages 241-244 , February 2009

Construction-related Differences Seen in Ureteral Access Sheaths: Comparison of Reinforced Versus Nonreinforced Ureteral Access Sheaths

Received 5 May 2008 ,Accepted 25 July 2008.

References 

  1. Takayasu H, Aso Y. Recent development for pyeloureteroscopy: Guide tube method for its introduction into the ureter. J Urol. 1974;112:176–178
  2. Auge BK, Pietrow PK, Lallas CD, et al. Ureteral access sheath provides protection against elevated renal pressures during routine flexible ureteroscopic stone manipulation. J Endourol. 2004;18:33–36
  3. Kourambas J, Byrne RR, Preminger GM. Does a ureteral access sheath facilitate ureteroscopy?. J Urol. 2001;165:789–793
  4. Grasso M, Bagley D. Small diameter, actively deflectable, flexible ureteropyeloscopy. J Urol. 1998;160:1648–1653
  5. Monga M, Best S, Venkatesh R, et al. Prospective randomized comparison of 2 ureteral access sheaths during flexible retrograde ureteroscopy. J Urol. 2004;172:572–573
  6. Monga M, Gawlik A, Durfee W. A systematic evaluation of ureteral access sheaths. Urology. 2004;63:834–836
  7. Pedro RN, Hendlin K, Durfee WK, et al. Physical characteristics of next-generation ureteral access sheaths: Buckling and kinking. Urology. 2007;70:440–442
  8. Pandey P. Complications in application of ureteral access sheath in community urological practice (abstract). J Endourol. 2003;17:A228
  9. Harper JD, Ebrahimi KY, Auge BK, et al. Comparison of a novel radially dilating balloon ureteral access sheath to a conventional sheath in the porcine model. J Urol. 2008;179:2042–2045

PII: S0090-4295(08)01424-6

doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2008.07.055

Urology
Volume 73, Issue 2 , Pages 241-244 , February 2009

Article Tools