Urology Research & Practice
ENDOUROLOGY - Review

Reporting the Impact of Pelvicalyceal System (PCS) Anatomy on Clinical Outcomes in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) Studies: Can We Do Better? – Methodological Review from the Section of EAU Endourology

1.

Department of Urology and Andrology, Astana Medical University, Astana, Kazakhstan

2.

Department of Urology and Oncology, Fergana Medical Institute of Public Health, Fergana, Uzbekistan

3.

Section of EAU Endourology Research Group

4.

Department of Urology, Sismanoglio Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece

5.

Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway

6.

Department of Urology, University General Hospital of Heraklion, University of Crete School of Medicine, Heraklion, Greece

7.

Section of EAU Focal Therapy and Laparoscopy Group

8.

Department of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy

9.

Section of EAU Endourology Bladder group

10.

Department of Urology, King Fahad General Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

11.

Department of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK

Urol Res Pract 2025; 51: 12-21
DOI: 10.5152/tud.2025.25032
Read: 179 Downloads: 168 Published: 21 May 2025

To analyze available randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with other modalities for urinary stone treatment to determine the extent of comparing the pelvicalyceal system (PCS) anatomy between patients. In December 2024, a search was conducted in databases and was limited to publications that describe comparisons of experimental and control groups in the context of RIRS for stones only in the kidney (PCS). Only RCTs comparing RIRS with other modalities without publication date restriction were included due to their highest level of evidence in the hierarchy of primary research. The parameters used in the selected studies were analyzed to compare the differences between the groups, focusing on PCS anatomy. The final analysis included 27 publications from 2421 articles. The pres-
ence and/or degree of hydronephrosis were analyzed in 8 studies. Direct morphometric measurements were compared in 4 studies and were focused on the lower pole only, namely the infundibulopelvic angle, infundibular length, and infundibular width. Features such as the position of the renal pelvis in relation to the kidney parenchyma (intrarenal, extrarenal), number and orientation of calyces, as well as the existing PCS
classifications were not compared or used. This review shows gaps in the literature while assessing and reporting on PCS anatomy in studies with RIRS. Unless studies mention these anatomical factors without excluding certain groups of patients, it is difficult to compare outcomes between modalities and in between studies.

Cite this article as: Talyshinskii A, Mukhambetov Y, Zhanbyrbekuly U, et"al. Reporting the impact of pelvicalyceal system (PCS) anatomy on clinical outcomes in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) studies:
can we do better? – Methodological review from the section of EAU Endourology. Urol Res Pract. 2025;51(1):12-21.

Files
EISSN 2980-1478