ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07866209Updated Oct 8, 2026

Comparison of Suction and Conventional Ureteral Access Sheaths in Kidney Stone Surgery

An observational study in Kidney Calculi and Nephrolithiasis, sponsored by Antalya Health Sciences University. Recruiting at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-08.

Sponsored by Antalya Health Sciences University · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Mar 2026; still recruiting 7 months later.
Updated Oct 8, 2026Newly registeredGo to Updates ↓
Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
160
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this observational study is to compare conventional and suction (aspiration) ureteral access sheaths used during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in adults with kidney stones.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

  • Does the use of a suction ureteral access sheath increase the stone-free rate compared with a conventional sheath?
  • Does the use of a suction sheath reduce operative time and complications such as postoperative fever and infection?

Researchers will compare patients treated with a conventional ureteral access sheath with patients treated with a suction ureteral access sheath during routine RIRS.

Participants will:

  • Undergo RIRS for kidney stones as part of their routine clinical care
  • Have their surgical data recorded, including operative time and any complications
  • Attend routine follow-up visits, including imaging to assess whether stones remain
Read the detailed description

Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is a widely used minimally invasive treatment for kidney stones. Ureteral access sheaths are commonly used during RIRS to facilitate repeated access to the kidney and to help maintain low intrarenal pressure. Suction (aspiration) ureteral access sheaths are a newer type of sheath that allows continuous removal of irrigation fluid and stone fragments during surgery, which may improve stone clearance and reduce infectious complications. This study aims to compare surgical outcomes, stone-free rates, and complication rates between conventional and suction ureteral access sheaths in patients undergoing RIRS. Both sheath types are CE-marked medical devices used within their intended purpose.

02

Conditions studied

  • Kidney Calculi
  • Nephrolithiasis

Keywords

  • Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery
  • Ureteral Access Sheath
  • Suction Ureteral Access Sheath
  • Flexible Ureteroscopy
  • Stone-Free Rate
03

In context

Kidney Calculi

605 studies on the registry are indexed under Kidney Calculi; 164 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 160 is close to the median of 146 across 114 observational studies indexed under Kidney Calculi.

Browse Kidney Calculi studies →

Lead sponsor

Antalya Health Sciences University is the lead sponsor of 17 studies on the registry; 9 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Adult patients with kidney stones who are scheduled to undergo retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with either a conventional or a suction ureteral access sheath at the Department of Urology, University of Health Sciences Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Antalya, Turkey.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age 18 years or older
  • Kidney stones scheduled for retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS)
  • Provision of written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Active untreated urinary tract infection
  • Uncorrected bleeding disorder or anticoagulant therapy that cannot be discontinued
  • Pregnancy
  • Anatomical abnormalities of the urinary tract (e.g., ureteral stricture, horseshoe kidney)
  • Failure to place a ureteral access sheath
  • Incomplete follow-up data
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
160 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Conventional Ureteral Access Sheath Group

    Adult patients with kidney stones undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with a conventional (non-suction) ureteral access sheath as part of routine clinical care.

    Device: Conventional Ureteral Access Sheath

  • Suction Ureteral Access Sheath Group

    Adult patients with kidney stones undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with a suction (aspiration) ureteral access sheath as part of routine clinical care.

    Device: Suction Ureteral Access Sheath

Interventions

  • DeviceConventional Ureteral Access Sheath

    A standard CE-marked ureteral access sheath without suction, placed during RIRS to provide repeated access to the kidney and facilitate irrigation outflow.

  • DeviceSuction Ureteral Access Sheath

    A CE-marked ureteral access sheath connected to a negative-pressure suction system, placed during RIRS to allow continuous aspiration of irrigation fluid and stone fragments.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Stone-Free Rate

    Proportion of patients who are stone-free, defined as no residual stone fragments or residual fragments smaller than 4 mm. Stone-free status will be assessed by non-contrast computed tomography (NCCT) or, for radiopaque stones, by plain kidney-ureter-bladder (KUB) radiography.

    Time frame: 1 month after surgery

Secondary outcomes

  1. Postoperative Fever and Infectious Complications

    Proportion of patients who develop postoperative fever (body temperature ≥38°C), urinary tract infection, or sepsis.

    Time frame: Within 7 days after surgery

  2. Operative Time

    Total duration of surgery, measured in minutes from insertion of the ureteroscope to placement of the ureteral stent or end of the procedure

    Time frame: During surgery

  3. Postoperative Complications

    Proportion of patients with postoperative complications, graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.

    Time frame: Within 30 days after surgery

  4. Total Laser Energy

    Total laser energy delivered during lithotripsy, measured in kilojoules (kJ) as recorded by the laser device.

    Time frame: During surgery

  5. Length of Hospital Stay

    Duration of hospital stay after surgery, measured in days.

    Time frame: From surgery to discharge, an average of 1-3 days

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • University of Health Sciences Antalya Training and Research Hospital
    Antalya, Muratpasa 07100, Turkey (Türkiye)
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Zhu Z, Cui Y, Zeng F, Li Y, Chen Z, Hequn C. Comparison of suctioning and traditional ureteral access sheath during flexible ureteroscopy in the treatment of renal stones. World J Urol. 2019 May;37(5):921-929. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2455-8. Epub 2018 Aug 17. PubMed 30120500 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — Individual participant data will not be shared publicly due to patient confidentiality and because the informed consent form did not include permission for data sharing. De-identified data may be made available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with approval of the ethics committee.

09

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Mar 2026 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Mar 2027, 12 months after the start.

Of 39 non-industry observational studies under Kidney Calculi, half reached primary completion within 42 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 14 and three quarters within 59. This study's planned 12 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 41 studies reached it within 42 months; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 59.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 4, 2026
First posted
Oct 8, 2026
StartActual
Mar 18, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Mar 30, 2027
CompletionEst.
May 1, 2027
Last update
Oct 8, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Registered
First appeared on the registry. No changes since
Oct 8, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 8, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07866209
Lead sponsor
Antalya Health Sciences University
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Oct 8, 2026
Start date
Mar 18, 2026
Primary completion
Mar 30, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
May 1, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 8, 2026

Study contacts

Baran Arslan
Contact
drbrnarsln@gmail.com
+90 5532487485
Mahmut E İslamoglu, Prof. Dr
study director · University of Health Sciences Antalya Training and Research Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion