Pub Date : 2025-10-01Epub Date: 2025-09-30DOI: 10.4103/iju.iju_439_25
Narmada Prasad Gupta
{"title":"Development of urology in India.","authors":"Narmada Prasad Gupta","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_439_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_439_25","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 4","pages":"239-241"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12530740/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145330555","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-10-01Epub Date: 2025-09-30DOI: 10.4103/iju.iju_386_25
Sumit Mandal
{"title":"Critical appraisal of a meta-analysis on pelvic lymph node dissection in muscle-invasive bladder cancer.","authors":"Sumit Mandal","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_386_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_386_25","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 4","pages":"321-322"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12530737/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145330603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-10-01Epub Date: 2025-09-30DOI: 10.4103/iju.iju_229_25
Jalaram Pachaiyappan, Santosh Kumar, Santhosh Nagasubramanian, T J Nirmal, Rajiv Paul Mukha, Chandrasingh Jeyachandra Berry
Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ultraslow shockwave (SW) lithotripsy compared with slow-rate SW lithotripsy (SWL) in the management of renal stones using a common power ramping protocol.
Methods: This randomized trial enrolled patients with solitary renal calculus ≤2 cms between December 2021 and February 2024. Ultraslow lithotripsy (40 patients) was applied at a rate of 30 shocks per minute and slowrate lithotripsy (40 patients) was applied at a rate of 60 shocks per minute. Common power ramping protocol was followed for both the groups. Up to a maximum of three sessions were carried out with follow-up at 3 months after the last session. The primary outcome was the stone-free rate.
Results: The overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 77.5% in the ultraslow arm and 72.5% in the slow-rate arm (P = 0.60). Ultraslow group attained a higher SFR after the first session (37.5% vs. 20%; P = 0.07) with significantly lesser number of shocks (1300 vs. 1500; P < 0.01). Complications were only mild and similar between both the groups (P = 0.06), with a longer treatment duration in the ultraslow group (100 min vs. 50 min; P < 0.01).
Conclusions: In the setting of an electromagnetic lithotripter with a common ramping protocol and equal energy SWs, both ultraslow and slowrate SWL achieved a comparable overall stone-free rate with a similar safety profile. Higher number of patients in the ultraslow arm, almost double that of the slow arm, attained stone-free status after the first session itself with significantly fewer shocks.
简介:本研究旨在评价超低冲击波碎石术(SW)与慢速冲击波碎石术(SWL)在治疗肾结石方面的疗效。方法:该随机试验招募了2021年12月至2024年2月期间≤2 cm的孤立性肾结石患者。超低碎石(40例)以每分钟30次电击的速度进行,慢速碎石(40例)以每分钟60次电击的速度进行。两组均采用了共同的功率递增方案。最多进行了三届会议,并在上届会议后三个月进行后续工作。主要观察指标是无结石率。结果:超慢组总无结石率(SFR)为77.5%,慢速组为72.5% (P = 0.60)。超低电击组在第一次电击后获得更高的SFR (37.5% vs. 20%; P = 0.07),且电击次数显著减少(1300 vs. 1500; P < 0.01)。两组并发症均较轻,且相似(P = 0.06),但超低组治疗时间较长(100 min vs 50 min; P < 0.01)。结论:在电磁碎石机中,采用相同的爬坡方案和等能量的SWL,超低速SWL和慢速SWL都获得了相当的总体脱石率,并且具有相似的安全性。超低速组的患者数量几乎是慢速组的两倍,在第一次治疗后达到无结石状态,电击明显减少。
{"title":"Ultraslow versus slow-rate shockwave lithotripsy in the management of renal stone: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Jalaram Pachaiyappan, Santosh Kumar, Santhosh Nagasubramanian, T J Nirmal, Rajiv Paul Mukha, Chandrasingh Jeyachandra Berry","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_229_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_229_25","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ultraslow shockwave (SW) lithotripsy compared with slow-rate SW lithotripsy (SWL) in the management of renal stones using a common power ramping protocol.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This randomized trial enrolled patients with solitary renal calculus ≤2 cms between December 2021 and February 2024. Ultraslow lithotripsy (40 patients) was applied at a rate of 30 shocks per minute and slowrate lithotripsy (40 patients) was applied at a rate of 60 shocks per minute. Common power ramping protocol was followed for both the groups. Up to a maximum of three sessions were carried out with follow-up at 3 months after the last session. The primary outcome was the stone-free rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 77.5% in the ultraslow arm and 72.5% in the slow-rate arm (<i>P</i> = 0.60). Ultraslow group attained a higher SFR after the first session (37.5% vs. 20%; <i>P</i> = 0.07) with significantly lesser number of shocks (1300 vs. 1500; <i>P</i> < 0.01). Complications were only mild and similar between both the groups (<i>P</i> = 0.06), with a longer treatment duration in the ultraslow group (100 min vs. 50 min; <i>P</i> < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In the setting of an electromagnetic lithotripter with a common ramping protocol and equal energy SWs, both ultraslow and slowrate SWL achieved a comparable overall stone-free rate with a similar safety profile. Higher number of patients in the ultraslow arm, almost double that of the slow arm, attained stone-free status after the first session itself with significantly fewer shocks.</p>","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 4","pages":"253-259"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12530746/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145330497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Horacio Sanguinetti, Juan Guillermo Ruiz, Maximiliano Lopez Silva, Norberto Bernardo
Introduction: Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal lithiasis is widely used, with single-use ureteroscopes offering an excellent option. However, their high cost poses a challenge, prompting consideration of reusing disposable instruments. This study aims to compare stone-free rates (SFR) and complications between reprocessed disposable ureteroscopes and new ones in a multicenter cohort.
Methods: This prospective, observational, multicenter study included patients who underwent RIRS between May 2022 and May 2023 at three centers in Argentina. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 used a brand new disposable ureteroscope and Group 2 used a reprocessed disposable ureteroscope. Stone size, location, stone-free rate, postoperative complications, and subjective evaluations of deflection and vision were analyzed.
Results: Seventy-seven patients were included: 21 in Group 1 and 56 in Group 2. The average stone size was 10.9 mm in Group 1 and 8.6 mm in Group 2 (P = 0.0188). Stone location in the renal pelvis was 42% in Group 1 and 25% in Group 2 (P = 0.406). SFR were 71.4% in Group 1 and 73.2% in Group 2 (P = 0.999). No differences were found regarding the subjective assessment of vision and deflection as evaluated by the surgeons. Postoperative urinary tract infections occurred in 9.5% of Group 1 and 16% of Group 2 (P = 0.717).
Conclusions: Despite the larger stone size in Group 1, the stone-free rate and postoperative infection rates were similar between both groups. Reprocessing disposable instruments does not appear to affect the effectiveness or infection rate of RIRS.
{"title":"Reused disposable ureteroscopes in retrograde intrarenal surgery: A new concept arises?","authors":"Horacio Sanguinetti, Juan Guillermo Ruiz, Maximiliano Lopez Silva, Norberto Bernardo","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_162_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_162_25","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal lithiasis is widely used, with single-use ureteroscopes offering an excellent option. However, their high cost poses a challenge, prompting consideration of reusing disposable instruments. This study aims to compare stone-free rates (SFR) and complications between reprocessed disposable ureteroscopes and new ones in a multicenter cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, observational, multicenter study included patients who underwent RIRS between May 2022 and May 2023 at three centers in Argentina. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 used a brand new disposable ureteroscope and Group 2 used a reprocessed disposable ureteroscope. Stone size, location, stone-free rate, postoperative complications, and subjective evaluations of deflection and vision were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-seven patients were included: 21 in Group 1 and 56 in Group 2. The average stone size was 10.9 mm in Group 1 and 8.6 mm in Group 2 (<i>P</i> = 0.0188). Stone location in the renal pelvis was 42% in Group 1 and 25% in Group 2 (<i>P</i> = 0.406). SFR were 71.4% in Group 1 and 73.2% in Group 2 (<i>P</i> = 0.999). No differences were found regarding the subjective assessment of vision and deflection as evaluated by the surgeons. Postoperative urinary tract infections occurred in 9.5% of Group 1 and 16% of Group 2 (<i>P</i> = 0.717).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the larger stone size in Group 1, the stone-free rate and postoperative infection rates were similar between both groups. Reprocessing disposable instruments does not appear to affect the effectiveness or infection rate of RIRS.</p>","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 3","pages":"216-219"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312838/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144776488","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ruben Crew, Grant Sajdak, Ala'a Farkouh, Kai Wen Cheng, Sikai Song, Ruby Kuang, Tekisha Lindler, Akin S Amasyali, Ali Albaghli, Zhamshid Okhunov, D Duane Baldwin
Introduction: Removal of entombed ureteral stents can be technically challenging, particularly if the stent were to fragment during removal. The purpose of this study was to compare the therapeutic suitability of the thulium fiber laser (TFL) and the holmium laser (HL) in the treatment of entombed stents.
Methods: In this benchtop study, first, the time taken for each laser to transect the stent was recorded in 10 experiments/laser. Next, the force required to break the stent following 5 s of laser contact was measured in 15 randomized experiments/laser. Finally, seven experiments of simulated ureteroscopy on entombed stents were performed per laser. Lasers were operated at 0.8 J, 12 Hz with 270 µm fibers, and 6 Fr stents were utilized. Endpoints included time to release the stent, laser energy, and stent damage.
Results: The stent transection time was shorter with the TFL compared to the HL (22.02 vs. 61.46 s; P < 0.001). After 5 s, the TFL transected the stent with lesser force compared to the HL (5.34 vs. 15.24 N; P = 0.004). Both required lesser force to break the stent compared to the baseline (33.8 N; P < 0.001). On simulated lithotripsy, the lithotripsy time (12.7 vs. 8.5 min; P = 0.11) and laser energy (4.7 vs. 2.7 kJ; P = 0.09) were similar between the TFL and HL. The mean stent damage score was higher when using the TFL compared to the HL (36.9 vs. 15.7; P = 0.017).
Conclusions: The TFL resulted in faster stent transection, reduced breakage force, and greater stent damage. Urologists should be cautious when releasing entombed stents using the TFL as the laser may significantly weaken the stent, increasing the risk of fracture during removal.
导读:埋入式输尿管支架的移除在技术上具有挑战性,特别是如果支架在移除过程中碎裂。本研究的目的是比较铥光纤激光(TFL)和钬激光(HL)治疗埋地支架的适用性。方法:在本台式研究中,首先记录每台激光横切支架所需的时间,每台激光10次。接下来,在15个随机实验/激光中测量激光接触5 s后支架断裂所需的力。最后,进行了7次模拟输尿管镜埋入式支架的实验。激光在0.8 J, 12 Hz, 270µm光纤下工作,使用6个Fr支架。终点包括支架释放时间、激光能量和支架损伤。结果:TFL组支架横断时间较HL组短(22.02 vs 61.46 s;P < 0.001)。5 s后,与HL相比,TFL以较小的力横切支架(5.34比15.24 N;P = 0.004)。与基线(33.8 N;P < 0.001)。在模拟碎石试验中,碎石时间(12.7 vs 8.5 min;P = 0.11)和激光能量(4.7 vs. 2.7 kJ;P = 0.09)。与HL相比,使用TFL的平均支架损伤评分更高(36.9 vs 15.7;P = 0.017)。结论:TFL使支架横断更快,断裂力减小,支架损伤更大。泌尿科医生在使用TFL释放埋入支架时应谨慎,因为激光可能会显著削弱支架,增加移除过程中骨折的风险。
{"title":"Thulium versus holmium: Which is safer for the removal of entombed stents?","authors":"Ruben Crew, Grant Sajdak, Ala'a Farkouh, Kai Wen Cheng, Sikai Song, Ruby Kuang, Tekisha Lindler, Akin S Amasyali, Ali Albaghli, Zhamshid Okhunov, D Duane Baldwin","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_6_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_6_25","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Removal of entombed ureteral stents can be technically challenging, particularly if the stent were to fragment during removal. The purpose of this study was to compare the therapeutic suitability of the thulium fiber laser (TFL) and the holmium laser (HL) in the treatment of entombed stents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this benchtop study, first, the time taken for each laser to transect the stent was recorded in 10 experiments/laser. Next, the force required to break the stent following 5 s of laser contact was measured in 15 randomized experiments/laser. Finally, seven experiments of simulated ureteroscopy on entombed stents were performed per laser. Lasers were operated at 0.8 J, 12 Hz with 270 µm fibers, and 6 Fr stents were utilized. Endpoints included time to release the stent, laser energy, and stent damage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The stent transection time was shorter with the TFL compared to the HL (22.02 vs. 61.46 s; <i>P</i> < 0.001). After 5 s, the TFL transected the stent with lesser force compared to the HL (5.34 vs. 15.24 N; <i>P</i> = 0.004). Both required lesser force to break the stent compared to the baseline (33.8 N; <i>P</i> < 0.001). On simulated lithotripsy, the lithotripsy time (12.7 vs. 8.5 min; <i>P</i> = 0.11) and laser energy (4.7 vs. 2.7 kJ; <i>P</i> = 0.09) were similar between the TFL and HL. The mean stent damage score was higher when using the TFL compared to the HL (36.9 vs. 15.7; <i>P</i> = 0.017).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The TFL resulted in faster stent transection, reduced breakage force, and greater stent damage. Urologists should be cautious when releasing entombed stents using the TFL as the laser may significantly weaken the stent, increasing the risk of fracture during removal.</p>","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 3","pages":"205-209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312839/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144776490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Alireza Ghoreifi, Richard Mateo Mora, Shivani Kandukuri, Hooman Djaladat
Benign metastasizing leiomyoma (BML) is thought to arise from either coelomic metaplasia of mesenchymal tissue or peritoneal seeding of uterine fibroid tissue, though its exact etiology is unknown. Herein, we present a 44-year-old Hispanic female with BML identified in the retroperitoneum in the setting of clear cell renal carcinoma. Routine follow-up computed tomography scan, 18 months after a robotic left partial nephrectomy for stage 1 renal tumor, revealed retroperitoneal (para-aortic) adenopathy. Percutaneous biopsy followed by robotic lymph node dissection confirmed the presence of BML. The patient remained asymptomatic with unremarkable imaging and laboratories within a 3-year follow-up.
{"title":"Benign metastasizing leiomyoma with retroperitoneal lymph node involvement in a patient with a history of renal cell carcinoma.","authors":"Alireza Ghoreifi, Richard Mateo Mora, Shivani Kandukuri, Hooman Djaladat","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_461_24","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_461_24","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Benign metastasizing leiomyoma (BML) is thought to arise from either coelomic metaplasia of mesenchymal tissue or peritoneal seeding of uterine fibroid tissue, though its exact etiology is unknown. Herein, we present a 44-year-old Hispanic female with BML identified in the retroperitoneum in the setting of clear cell renal carcinoma. Routine follow-up computed tomography scan, 18 months after a robotic left partial nephrectomy for stage 1 renal tumor, revealed retroperitoneal (para-aortic) adenopathy. Percutaneous biopsy followed by robotic lymph node dissection confirmed the presence of BML. The patient remained asymptomatic with unremarkable imaging and laboratories within a 3-year follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 3","pages":"222-224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312831/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144776548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editorial comment: Is 23-h discharge following robotic radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy feasible and safe in a quaternary care centre in a developing country?","authors":"Amit Satish Bhattu","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_107_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_107_25","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 3","pages":"204"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312832/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144776551","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editorial comment: The reusability conundrum: Considerations for reusing surgical disposables in research setting.","authors":"Madhur Anand","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_222_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_222_25","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 3","pages":"220-221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312833/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144776552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Re: Does chatGPT-4.0's awareness of conversing with a urologist affect the accuracy of responses to questions about \"sexually transmitted urethritis in men\"?","authors":"Hinpetch Daungsupawong, Viroj Wiwanitkit","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_169_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_169_25","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 3","pages":"234"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312829/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144776486","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Renal lymphangiectasia is a benign disorder characterized by cystic dilatation of lymphatic channels in the kidney. It can occur in the perinephric, renal sinus, and intrarenal locations. We describe an uncommon case of renal sinus lymphangiectasia with a characteristic imaging appearance in a 25-year-old female. She presented with loin pain that was managed conservatively.
{"title":"Renal sinus lymphangiectasia: An uncommon entity.","authors":"Divij Agarwal, Pradeep Hatimota, Chandan J Das","doi":"10.4103/iju.iju_29_25","DOIUrl":"10.4103/iju.iju_29_25","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Renal lymphangiectasia is a benign disorder characterized by cystic dilatation of lymphatic channels in the kidney. It can occur in the perinephric, renal sinus, and intrarenal locations. We describe an uncommon case of renal sinus lymphangiectasia with a characteristic imaging appearance in a 25-year-old female. She presented with loin pain that was managed conservatively.</p>","PeriodicalId":47352,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Urology","volume":"41 3","pages":"228-229"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312840/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144776487","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}