Comprehensive comparative investigations between HugeMed HU30M 6.3 Fr f-URS and traditional approach f-URS devices in RIRS are lacking in an American population. The investigators aim to compare the outcomes of using the 6.3 Fr f-URS versus traditional approach (other f-URS present in our institution) to treat patients with stone burden ≤ 2.5 cm. The findings of this study will expand on the potential advantages and drawbacks of HU30M in enhancing surgical outcomes and patient safety in RIRS procedures. We hypothesize that the use of the HU30M will result in increased cost savings while providing similar stone free rates when compared to traditionally used f-URS devices.
Age range
18 Years
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.
To evaluate and compare outcomes and costs associated with hugeMed 6.3 Fr flexible URS versus traditional approach in RIRS
Timeframe: 36 months