Use of XenX™, the latest ureteric occlusion device with guide wire utility: results from a prospective multicentric comparative study
- 166 Downloads
This is a prospective multicentric comparative study evaluating the performance of XenX—a new dual-purpose device for the prevention of stone fragments migration during ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URS).
Between March 2014 and January 2015, 41 patients undertaking URS + XenX were matched with 41 patients undergoing standard URS. Patients included had unilateral ureteric stone(s) of 0.5–1.5 cm in maximum size. Demographics, complication rates and surgical outcomes were recorded for comparison. A Likert-like 5-grade scoring system was used for surgeons’ evaluation of XenX properties. Cost analysis was performed by comparing weighted mean costs of the relevant procedures.
Patients’ characteristics between the two groups were comparable. Lasering time was longer for XenX group (13.59 vs. 5.17 min; p = 0.0001) whilst use of basket and need of JJ stent insertion was more frequent in control group (19.5 vs. 97.6 %; p = 0.0001 and 22 vs. 35 %; p = 0.001, respectively). Intra-operative SFR was significantly higher for XenX group (100 vs. 85.4 %; p = 0.0001), but not at 4-week follow-up, after ancillary procedures were needed in 17.1 % of the control group. Surgeons’ evaluations for XenX were suboptimal for “Ease of Basketing” (2/5) and “Advancement of double J stent” (3/5). The use of XenX increased costs of procedures, but spared the costs associated to ancillary procedures and stent removals.
XenX confirmed to be a safe and effective device especially for the treatment of upper ureteric tract stones; moreover, XenX may reduce the risk for the need of auxiliary procedures and for the insertion of a JJ stent.
KeywordsUreteric stone Preventive retropulsion device New technology Endoscopic lithotripsy
F. Sanguedolce involved in protocol/project development, data collection, management, data analysis and manuscript writing/editing. E. Montanari and O. Traxer involved in protocol/project development and manuscript writing/editing. M. Alvarez-Maestro, N. Macchione and S. Hruby involved in protocol/project development and data collection. A. Papatsoris involved in protocol/project development, data collection and manuscript editing. P. Kallidonis, P. Honeck and L. Villa involved in protocol/project development and data collection. F. Greco: protocol/project development, data collection and manuscript writing/editing.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Prof E. Montanari is Olympus stone advisory board; Prof O. Traxer is consultant for Olympus, Coloplast, Rocamed and Boston Sc.; Dr. F. Sanguedolce received grants from Xenolith in 2013 in support of registration fees for the EAU Annual Meeting and the World Congress of Endourology.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 10.Barkun JS, Aronson JK, Feldman LS, Maddern GJ, Strasberg SM, Balliol C, Altman DG, Barkun JS, Blazeby JM, Boutron IC, Campbell WB, Clavien PA, Cook JA, Ergina PL, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC, McCulloch P, Nicholl J, Reeves BC, Seiler CM, Meakins JL, Ashby D, Black N, Bunker J, Burton M, Campbell M, Chalkidou K, Chalmers I, de Leval M, Deeks J, Grant A, Gray M, Greenhalgh R, Jenicek M, Kehoe S, Lilford R, Littlejohns P, Loke Y, Madhock R, McPherson K, Rothwell P, Summerskill B, Taggart D, Tekkis P, Thompson M, Treasure T, Trohler U, Vandenbroucke J (2009) Evaluation and stages of surgical innovations. Lancet 374(9695):1089–1096. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61083-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar