Mohamed Abdel_rahman Alhefnawy
Asst. Professor
Comparative evaluation of flexible and navigable suction sheath (FANS), percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN), and conventional ureteral access sheath (UAS) during retrograde intrarenal surgery: a randomized controlled trial
World Journal of Urology • 2026
Publication Information
Authors
M A Alhefnawy;
· T. M. El-Karamany;
;M Farag;
;M Mobarak;
·
I S A Mohamed
· H Shaher
Keywords
Retrograde intrarenal surgery ;Flexible and navigable suction · Percutaneous nephrostomy; Ureteral access
sheath ;Stone-free rate ;Renal stones
Journal
World Journal of Urology
Publisher
Springer nature
Volume
Not Available
Issue
Not Available
Pages
44:322
publication.type
International
Paper Link
Open Link
Supplementary Materials
Not Available
Abstract
Purpose Optimizing drainage during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is crucial for procedural efficacy and safety.
Flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) offers active intrarenal suction without external access, while
percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) provides reliable but invasive drainage. This study compared the efficacy and safety of
FANS versus PCN tube drainage during RIRS as compared to conventional ureteral access sheath (UAS).
Methods This randomized controlled trial included 217 adult patients with renal stones (14–27 mm) undergoing RIRS.
Patients were randomized into three groups: (UAS, n=72), PCN (n=72), and FANS (n=73). Outcomes assessed included
operative time, stone-free rate (SFR), complications, and postoperative recovery.
Results SFR was significantly higher with PCN (97.2%) and FANS (98.6%) versus UAS (81.9%; p
Flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS) offers active intrarenal suction without external access, while
percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) provides reliable but invasive drainage. This study compared the efficacy and safety of
FANS versus PCN tube drainage during RIRS as compared to conventional ureteral access sheath (UAS).
Methods This randomized controlled trial included 217 adult patients with renal stones (14–27 mm) undergoing RIRS.
Patients were randomized into three groups: (UAS, n=72), PCN (n=72), and FANS (n=73). Outcomes assessed included
operative time, stone-free rate (SFR), complications, and postoperative recovery.
Results SFR was significantly higher with PCN (97.2%) and FANS (98.6%) versus UAS (81.9%; p