{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,5]],"date-time":"2026-09-05T21:30:52Z","timestamp":1788643852487,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":53,"publisher":"MDPI AG","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2022,10,3]],"date-time":"2022-10-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1664755200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/"}],"funder":[{"name":"Urological Science Institute and Research Affairs"},{"name":"Yonsei University College of Medicine"},{"name":"Inha University Institutional Open Access Program (IOAP)"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Medicina"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Background and Objectives: Disposable flexible ureteroscopes have been widely used because of their cost-effectiveness and higher sterility potential compared with reusable flexible ureteroscopes. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes and complication rates in patients who undergo reusable or disposable flexible ureteroscopic stone surgeries (fURS) for urinary stone disease. Materials and Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted under the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022331291). Clinical trials comparing reusable and disposable fURS for stone disease were found from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science up to March 2022. Participants were patients with upper urinary tract stones; the interventions were reusable or disposable fURS. Outcomes, including stone-free rate, operation time, length of hospital stay, and complication rate, were compared for analysis. Results: Overall, 111 studies were identified, but after removing duplicate studies, 75 studies remained. Thirty-two of these studies were excluded. Of the 43 screened studies, 11 met the eligibility criteria. There was no difference in the stone-free rate (SFR) between disposable and reusable fURS (p = 0.14; OR = 1.36; 95% CI, 0.9 to 2.04). For operation time, no difference was identified between reusable and disposable fURS groups (p = 0.12; MD = \u22125.31; 95% CI, \u221212.08 to 1.46). For hospital stay, there was also no difference between the two groups (p = 0.61; MD = \u22120.03; 95% CI, \u22120.17 to 0.10). There was no significant difference in complication rate between the two groups (p = 0.85; OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.61). Conclusions: There were no differences in the SFR, operation time, length of hospital stay, and complication rate between reusable and disposable fURS. Disposable fURS may be a comparable alternative to reusable fURS.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3390\/medicina58101388","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2022,10,9]],"date-time":"2022-10-09T04:00:02Z","timestamp":1665288002000},"page":"1388","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/mdpi_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":19,"title":["Comparison of Surgical Outcomes between Single-Use and Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes for Renal Stone Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis"],"prefix":"10.3390","volume":"58","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-7928-5659","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Dae Young","family":"Jun","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3500-8833","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Kang Su","family":"Cho","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Prostate Cancer Center, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 06273, Korea"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jae Yong","family":"Jeong","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-4711-772X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Young Joon","family":"Moon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-0814-7336","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Dong Hyuk","family":"Kang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon 22212, Korea"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-8287-585X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Hae Do","family":"Jung","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine, Goyang 10380, Korea"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3470-1767","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Joo Yong","family":"Lee","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Korea"},{"name":"Center of Evidence Based Medicine, Institute of Convergence Science, Yonsei University, Seoul 03722, Korea"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"1968","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2022,10,3]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref_1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"37","DOI":"10.1016\/j.euros.2021.10.008","article-title":"Global Trends in Incidence and Burden of Urolithiasis from 1990 to 2019: An Analysis of Global Burden of Disease Study Data","volume":"35","author":"Lang","year":"2022","journal-title":"Eur. Urol. Open Sci."},{"key":"ref_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"27","DOI":"10.1007\/s00240-020-01210-w","article-title":"Trends in the prevalence of kidney stones in the United States from 2007 to 2016","volume":"49","author":"Chewcharat","year":"2021","journal-title":"Urolithiasis"},{"key":"ref_3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"18","DOI":"10.1016\/j.euf.2017.04.001","article-title":"Burden of Urolithiasis: Trends in Prevalence, Treatments, and Costs","volume":"3","author":"Raheem","year":"2017","journal-title":"Eur. Urol. Focus"},{"key":"ref_4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"205","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajur.2018.08.007","article-title":"Epidemiology of urolithiasis in Asia","volume":"5","author":"Liu","year":"2018","journal-title":"Asian J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"462","DOI":"10.4111\/icu.20210039","article-title":"Large database study of urinary stone composition in South Korea: Korean Society of Endourology and Robotics (KSER) research series","volume":"62","author":"Jung","year":"2021","journal-title":"Investig. Clin. Urol."},{"key":"ref_6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"475","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eururo.2015.07.041","article-title":"EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis","volume":"69","author":"Sarica","year":"2016","journal-title":"Eur. Urol."},{"key":"ref_7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"440","DOI":"10.3349\/ymj.2022.63.5.440","article-title":"The First 100 Cases of Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery in Korea: Matched Cohort Analyses versus Shock-Wave Lithotripsy","volume":"63","author":"Jung","year":"2022","journal-title":"Yonsei Med. J."},{"key":"ref_8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"303","DOI":"10.3349\/ymj.2018.59.2.303","article-title":"Digital Videoscopic Retrograde Intrarenal Surgeries for Renal Stones: Time-to-Maximal Stone Length Ratio Analysis","volume":"59","author":"Jeong","year":"2018","journal-title":"Yonsei Med. J."},{"key":"ref_9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"435","DOI":"10.1016\/0090-4295(94)90226-7","article-title":"A 7.5\/8.2 F actively deflectable, flexible ureteroscope: A new device for both diagnostic and therapeutic upper urinary tract endoscopy","volume":"43","author":"Grasso","year":"1994","journal-title":"Urology"},{"key":"ref_10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"241","DOI":"10.4111\/icu.20210162","article-title":"Lasers for the treatment of urinary stone disease","volume":"62","author":"Lee","year":"2021","journal-title":"Investig. Clin. Urol."},{"key":"ref_11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"9795","DOI":"10.1038\/s41598-018-28247-7","article-title":"Evaluation of Performance Parameters of the Disposable Flexible Ureterorenoscope (LITHOVUE) in Patients with Renal Stones: A Prospective, Observational, Single-arm, Multicenter Study","volume":"8","author":"Cho","year":"2018","journal-title":"Sci. Rep."},{"key":"ref_12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"999","DOI":"10.1111\/iju.14091","article-title":"Single use versus reusable digital flexible ureteroscopes: A prospective comparative study","volume":"26","author":"Kam","year":"2019","journal-title":"Int. J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"55","DOI":"10.1111\/bju.14235","article-title":"Single-use disposable digital flexible ureteroscopes: An ex vivo assessment and cost analysis","volume":"121","author":"Hennessey","year":"2018","journal-title":"BJU Int."},{"key":"ref_14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"113","DOI":"10.1097\/MOU.0000000000000700","article-title":"Flexible ureteroscopy: Reuse? Or is single use the new direction?","volume":"30","author":"Ventimiglia","year":"2020","journal-title":"Curr. Opin. Urol."},{"key":"ref_15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., and Altman, D.G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med., 6.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1000097"},{"key":"ref_16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"557","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.327.7414.557","article-title":"Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses","volume":"327","author":"Higgins","year":"2003","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"ref_17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"224","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2015.04.018","article-title":"Comparing the Efficacy of a Multimodular Flexible Ureteroscope with Its Conventional Counterpart in the Management of Renal Stones","volume":"86","author":"Ding","year":"2015","journal-title":"Urology"},{"key":"ref_18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"476","DOI":"10.1159\/000521505","article-title":"Clinical Evaluation of Single-Use, Fiber-Optic, and Digital Ureterorenoscopes in the Treatment of Kidney Stones","volume":"106","author":"Eismann","year":"2022","journal-title":"Urol. Int."},{"key":"ref_19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3643","DOI":"10.1007\/s00345-021-03656-y","article-title":"Efficiency of retrograde intrarenal surgery in lower pole stones: Disposable flexible ureterorenoscope or reusable flexible ureterorenoscope?","volume":"39","author":"Karalezli","year":"2021","journal-title":"World J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"778157","DOI":"10.3389\/fsurg.2021.778157","article-title":"Single-Use vs. Reusable Digital Flexible Ureteroscope to Treat Upper Urinary Calculi: A Propensity-Score Matching Analysis","volume":"8","author":"Huang","year":"2021","journal-title":"Front. Surg."},{"key":"ref_21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"587","DOI":"10.1007\/s00240-018-1042-1","article-title":"Clinical outcomes and costs of reusable and single-use flexible ureterorenoscopes: A prospective cohort study","volume":"46","author":"Mager","year":"2018","journal-title":"Urolithiasis"},{"key":"ref_22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"326","DOI":"10.4081\/aiua.2021.3.326","article-title":"Comparison of a single-use, digital flexible ureteroscope with a reusable, fiberoptic ureteroscope for management of patients with urolithiasis","volume":"93","author":"Mourmouris","year":"2021","journal-title":"Arch. Ital. Urol. E Androl."},{"key":"ref_23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"18","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2019.0473","article-title":"Single-Use Versus Reusable Digital Flexible Ureteroscopes for the Treatment of Renal Calculi: A Prospective Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial","volume":"34","author":"Qi","year":"2020","journal-title":"J. Endourol."},{"key":"ref_24","first-page":"280","article-title":"Endoscopic treatment of lower pole stones: Is a disposable ureteroscope preferable? Results of a prospective case-control study","volume":"72","author":"Cabello","year":"2019","journal-title":"Cent. Eur. J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"468","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2017.0027","article-title":"A Prospective Case-Control Study Comparing LithoVue, a Single-Use, Flexible Disposable Ureteroscope, with Flexible, Reusable Fiber-Optic Ureteroscopes","volume":"31","author":"Usawachintachit","year":"2017","journal-title":"J. Endourol."},{"key":"ref_26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1773","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2021.0170","article-title":"Single-Use Digital Flexible Ureteroscopes as a Safe and Effective Choice for the Treatment of Lower Pole Renal Stones: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized-Controlled Trial","volume":"35","author":"Yang","year":"2021","journal-title":"J. Endourol."},{"key":"ref_27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"110","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-5347(17)64066-7","article-title":"Fiber optics in urology","volume":"91","author":"Marshall","year":"1964","journal-title":"J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_28","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"97","DOI":"10.1159\/000279719","article-title":"Clinical application of fiber-optic pyeloureteroscope","volume":"26","author":"Takayasu","year":"1971","journal-title":"Urol. Int."},{"key":"ref_29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"296","DOI":"10.1016\/0090-4295(87)90074-4","article-title":"Flexible ureteropyeloscopy with modular, \u201cdisposable\u201d endoscope","volume":"29","author":"Bagley","year":"1987","journal-title":"Urology"},{"key":"ref_30","first-page":"586","article-title":"Understanding the costs of flexible ureteroscopy","volume":"68","author":"Ziemba","year":"2016","journal-title":"Minerva Urol. Nefrol."},{"key":"ref_31","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"658","DOI":"10.1590\/s1677-5538.ibju.2018.0880","article-title":"A comprehensive literature-based equation to compare cost-effectiveness of a flexible ureteroscopy program with single-use versus reusable devices","volume":"45","author":"Marchini","year":"2019","journal-title":"Int. Braz. J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_32","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"958","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2005.05.033","article-title":"Location and etiology of flexible and semirigid ureteroscope damage","volume":"66","author":"Sung","year":"2005","journal-title":"Urology"},{"key":"ref_33","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1164","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-5347(05)67133-9","article-title":"Flexible ureteroscopes: A single center evaluation of the durability and function of the new endoscopes smaller than 9Fr","volume":"164","author":"Afane","year":"2000","journal-title":"J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_34","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1105","DOI":"10.1016\/j.euf.2018.03.001","article-title":"Durability of Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Prospective Evaluation of Longevity, the Factors that Affect it, and Damage Mechanisms","volume":"5","author":"Legemate","year":"2019","journal-title":"Eur. Urol. Focus"},{"key":"ref_35","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1144","DOI":"10.1097\/JU.0000000000000108","article-title":"Pre-Use Ureteroscope Contamination after High Level Disinfection: Reprocessing Effectiveness and the Relation with Cumulative Ureteroscope Use","volume":"201","author":"Legemate","year":"2019","journal-title":"J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_36","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"87","DOI":"10.1097\/MOU.0000000000000852","article-title":"Single-use flexible ureteroscopes: How to choose and what is around the corner?","volume":"31","author":"Bahaee","year":"2021","journal-title":"Curr. Opin. Urol."},{"key":"ref_37","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"515","DOI":"10.3349\/ymj.2020.61.6.515","article-title":"Does Early Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Improve the Cost-Effectiveness of Renal Stone Management?","volume":"61","author":"Yang","year":"2020","journal-title":"Yonsei Med. J."},{"key":"ref_38","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"730","DOI":"10.1016\/j.juro.2016.09.085","article-title":"The Economic Implications of a Reusable Flexible Digital Ureteroscope: A Cost-Benefit Analysis","volume":"197","author":"Martin","year":"2017","journal-title":"J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_39","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1735","DOI":"10.1007\/s11255-019-02230-1","article-title":"Comparative medico-economic study of reusable vs. single-use flexible ureteroscopes","volume":"51","author":"Martin","year":"2019","journal-title":"Int. Urol. Nephrol."},{"key":"ref_40","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1226","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2017.0427","article-title":"Retrospective Cost Analysis of a Single-Center Reusable Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Program: A Comparative Cost Simulation of Disposable fURS as an Alternative","volume":"31","author":"Ozimek","year":"2017","journal-title":"J. Endourol."},{"key":"ref_41","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"888","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajic.2017.03.016","article-title":"The effectiveness of sterilization for flexible ureteroscopes: A real-world study","volume":"45","author":"Ofstead","year":"2017","journal-title":"Am. J. Infect. Control"},{"key":"ref_42","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"630","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2017.0109","article-title":"Which Flexible Ureteroscopes (Digital vs. Fiber-Optic) Can Easily Reach the Difficult Lower Pole Calices and Have Better End-Tip Deflection: In Vitro Study on K-Box. A petra Evaluation","volume":"31","author":"Dragos","year":"2017","journal-title":"J. Endourol."},{"key":"ref_43","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1411","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2009.0645","article-title":"Heterogeneity in the reporting of disease characteristics and treatment outcomes in studies evaluating treatments for nephrolithiasis","volume":"24","author":"Hyams","year":"2010","journal-title":"J. Endourol."},{"key":"ref_44","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"676","DOI":"10.1016\/S0022-5347(01)63699-1","article-title":"Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: The impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy","volume":"159","author":"Elbahnasy","year":"1998","journal-title":"J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_45","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"813523","DOI":"10.1155\/2012\/813523","article-title":"Impact of Residual Fragments following Endourological Treatments in Renal Stones","volume":"2012","author":"Acar","year":"2012","journal-title":"Adv. Urol."},{"key":"ref_46","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"281","DOI":"10.1038\/nrurol.2015.74","article-title":"What is the stone-free rate following flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stones?","volume":"12","author":"Ghani","year":"2015","journal-title":"Nat. Rev. Urol."},{"key":"ref_47","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.14777\/uti.2019.14.1.1","article-title":"Recommendations for Antibacterial Prophylaxis in Endourological Procedures","volume":"14","author":"Chung","year":"2019","journal-title":"Urogenit. Tract. Infect."},{"key":"ref_48","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Jung, H.D., Cho, K.S., Moon, Y.J., Chung, D.Y., Kang, D.H., and Lee, J.Y. (2022). Antibiotic prophylaxis for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 17.","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0267233"},{"key":"ref_49","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"25","DOI":"10.1016\/j.urology.2022.01.033","article-title":"Reprocessing Effectiveness for Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Critical Look at the Evidence","volume":"164","author":"Ofstead","year":"2022","journal-title":"Urology"},{"key":"ref_50","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"483","DOI":"10.21037\/tau-20-1009","article-title":"Comparison of single-use and reusable flexible ureteroscope for renal stone management: A pooled analysis of 772 patients","volume":"10","author":"Li","year":"2021","journal-title":"Transl. Androl. Urol."},{"key":"ref_51","first-page":"459","article-title":"Comparison of pre- and post-surgical images of reusable and single use flexible ureteroscopes: A qualitative analysis","volume":"74","author":"Domenech","year":"2021","journal-title":"Cent. Eur. J. Urol."},{"key":"ref_52","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S418","DOI":"10.21037\/tau.2019.06.13","article-title":"Reusable flexible ureterorenoscopes are more cost-effective than single-use scopes: Results of a systematic review from petra Uro-group","volume":"8","author":"Talso","year":"2019","journal-title":"Transl. Androl. Urol."},{"key":"ref_53","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"214","DOI":"10.1089\/end.2018.0001","article-title":"Carbon Footprint in Flexible Ureteroscopy: A Comparative Study on the Environmental Impact of Reusable and Single-Use Ureteroscopes","volume":"32","author":"Davis","year":"2018","journal-title":"J. Endourol."}],"container-title":["Medicina"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/1648-9144\/58\/10\/1388\/pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,11]],"date-time":"2025-10-11T00:45:59Z","timestamp":1760143559000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.mdpi.com\/1648-9144\/58\/10\/1388"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2022,10,3]]},"references-count":53,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2022,10]]}},"alternative-id":["medicina58101388"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/medicina58101388","relation":{},"ISSN":["1648-9144"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1648-9144","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2022,10,3]]}}}