BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Peditrol is a novel hands-free irrigation device that delivers a bolus of irrigant through the ureteroscope when the foot pedal is deployed. The purpose of this study was to compare the flow and pressures created by the Peditrol with those of commonly used methods of irrigation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Flows through a flexible 6.9F Olympus ureteroscope (F-URS) and a 7.5F semirigid ACMI ureteroscope (S-URS) were measured in duplicate with the working channel empty and with a 2.2F Nitinol basket or a laser fiber in the working port. Irrigant flow was pressurized by gravity drainage at 100 cm H(2)O (GI), pressurized irrigant bag at 300 cm H(2)O (PI), handheld 60-cc syringe (HS), and the Peditrol. A 20-gauge angiocatheter was placed through the parenchyma into the renal pelvis of an ex-vivo cadaveric porcine kidney and attached to a pressure transducer. Pressures were measured in triplicate using the same irrigation techniques. RESULTS: With a basket or 200-microm laser fiber in the working port of the F-URS, Peditrol mean flows were superior to those of PI (3.3 and 6.3 times, respectively; P < 0.001) but similar to those of HS (0.7 to 1.1 times). All irrigation types resulted in intrarenal pressures greater than gravity irrigation (P < 0.05). The Peditrol demonstrated intrapelvic pressures <40 cm H(2)O when used with a 12/14F ureteral access sheath (AS). Without an AS, the intrapelvic pressure reached 92 cm H(2)O, similar to the pressures reached with the S-URS under various irrigation conditions (84-287 cm H(2)O) and comparable to the HS method through the F-URS (97 cm H(2)O). CONCLUSIONS: The Peditrol irrigation device generates superior flow through an F-URS compared with GI or PI, particularly with an instrument in the working port. Intrarenal pressures when used with an F-URS and AS are low. When an AS is not used, the intrarenal pressure is similar to or lower than pressures obtained using an S-URS with different irrigation modalities.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Peditrol is a novel hands-free irrigation device that delivers a bolus of irrigant through the ureteroscope when the foot pedal is deployed. The purpose of this study was to compare the flow and pressures created by the Peditrol with those of commonly used methods of irrigation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Flows through a flexible 6.9F Olympus ureteroscope (F-URS) and a 7.5F semirigid ACMI ureteroscope (S-URS) were measured in duplicate with the working channel empty and with a 2.2F Nitinol basket or a laser fiber in the working port. Irrigant flow was pressurized by gravity drainage at 100 cm H(2)O (GI), pressurized irrigant bag at 300 cm H(2)O (PI), handheld 60-cc syringe (HS), and the Peditrol. A 20-gauge angiocatheter was placed through the parenchyma into the renal pelvis of an ex-vivo cadaveric porcine kidney and attached to a pressure transducer. Pressures were measured in triplicate using the same irrigation techniques. RESULTS: With a basket or 200-microm laser fiber in the working port of the F-URS, Peditrol mean flows were superior to those of PI (3.3 and 6.3 times, respectively; P < 0.001) but similar to those of HS (0.7 to 1.1 times). All irrigation types resulted in intrarenal pressures greater than gravity irrigation (P < 0.05). The Peditrol demonstrated intrapelvic pressures <40 cm H(2)O when used with a 12/14F ureteral access sheath (AS). Without an AS, the intrapelvic pressure reached 92 cm H(2)O, similar to the pressures reached with the S-URS under various irrigation conditions (84-287 cm H(2)O) and comparable to the HS method through the F-URS (97 cm H(2)O). CONCLUSIONS: The Peditrol irrigation device generates superior flow through an F-URS compared with GI or PI, particularly with an instrument in the working port. Intrarenal pressures when used with an F-URS and AS are low. When an AS is not used, the intrarenal pressure is similar to or lower than pressures obtained using an S-URS with different irrigation modalities.
Authors: Francis A Jefferson; John M Sung; Luke Limfueco; Sherry Lu; Courtney M Cottone; Shlomi Tapiero; Roshan M Patel; Ralph V Clayman; Jaime Landman Journal: J Endourol Date: 2019-11-20 Impact factor: 2.942