Limitations
Our study is retrospective in nature, which may lead to selection bias.
We tried to overcome this limitation by including all cases operated for
kidney and upper ureteral stones during the study period. The data of
four different centres were included in the study. While the
multicentric nature of the study increases the quality, doubts about the
technique arise from different surgeons operating. However, the surgeons
in different centres have at least five years of experience and the
surgical steps used are similar. Removal of the use of balloons and
coaxial dilators from the study provides method harmony and shows the
direct effect of our technique. Other conditions, such as previous
same-side ureteroscopy or JJ stent and known renal anatomical
abnormalities that may overshadow the effectiveness of sURS for optical
ureteral dilatation and selection of the correct UAS size, have been
excluded from the study. Other drawbacks of the study are that while
operation and fluoroscopy times are calculated, the duration of UAS has
not been calculated, and the lack of long-term follow-ups and stenosis
rates.
Acknowledegements: None
Conflicts of interest: The authors have declared that they have
no conflicts of interest.
Funding: None