BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent advances and the widespread availability of smartphones have ushered in a new wave of innovations in healthcare. We present our initial experience with Endockscope, a new docking system that optimizes the coupling of the iPhone 4S with modern endoscopes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the United States Air Force resolution target, we compared the image resolution (line pairs/mm) of a flexible cystoscope coupled to the Endockscope+iPhone to the Storz high definition (HD) camera (H3-Z Versatile). We then used the Munsell ColorChecker chart to compare the color resolution with a 0° laparoscope. Furthermore, 12 expert endoscopists blindly compared and evaluated images from a porcine model using a cystoscope and ureteroscope for both systems. Finally, we also compared the cost (average of two company listed prices) and weight (lb) of the two systems. RESULTS: Overall, the image resolution allowed by the Endockscope was identical to the traditional HD camera (4.49 vs 4.49 lp/mm). Red (ΔE=9.26 vs 9.69) demonstrated better color resolution for iPhone, but green (ΔE=7.76 vs 10.95), and blue (ΔE=12.35 vs 14.66) revealed better color resolution with the Storz HD camera. Expert reviews of cystoscopic images acquired with the HD camera were superior in image, color, and overall quality (P=0.002, 0.042, and 0.003). In contrast, the ureteroscopic reviews yielded no statistical difference in image, color, and overall (P=1, 0.203, and 0.120) quality. The overall cost of the Endockscope+iPhone was $154 compared with $46,623 for a standard HD system. The weight of the mobile-coupled system was 0.47 lb and 1.01 lb for the Storz HD camera. CONCLUSION: Endockscope demonstrated feasibility of coupling endoscopes to a smartphone. The lighter and inexpensive Endockscope acquired images of the same resolution and acceptable color resolution. When evaluated by expert endoscopists, the quality of the images overall were equivalent for flexible ureteroscopy and somewhat inferior, but still acceptable for flexible cystoscopy.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent advances and the widespread availability of smartphones have ushered in a new wave of innovations in healthcare. We present our initial experience with Endockscope, a new docking system that optimizes the coupling of the iPhone 4S with modern endoscopes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the United States Air Force resolution target, we compared the image resolution (line pairs/mm) of a flexible cystoscope coupled to the Endockscope+iPhone to the Storz high definition (HD) camera (H3-Z Versatile). We then used the Munsell ColorChecker chart to compare the color resolution with a 0° laparoscope. Furthermore, 12 expert endoscopists blindly compared and evaluated images from a porcine model using a cystoscope and ureteroscope for both systems. Finally, we also compared the cost (average of two company listed prices) and weight (lb) of the two systems. RESULTS: Overall, the image resolution allowed by the Endockscope was identical to the traditional HD camera (4.49 vs 4.49 lp/mm). Red (ΔE=9.26 vs 9.69) demonstrated better color resolution for iPhone, but green (ΔE=7.76 vs 10.95), and blue (ΔE=12.35 vs 14.66) revealed better color resolution with the Storz HD camera. Expert reviews of cystoscopic images acquired with the HD camera were superior in image, color, and overall quality (P=0.002, 0.042, and 0.003). In contrast, the ureteroscopic reviews yielded no statistical difference in image, color, and overall (P=1, 0.203, and 0.120) quality. The overall cost of the Endockscope+iPhone was $154 compared with $46,623 for a standard HD system. The weight of the mobile-coupled system was 0.47 lb and 1.01 lb for the Storz HD camera. CONCLUSION: Endockscope demonstrated feasibility of coupling endoscopes to a smartphone. The lighter and inexpensive Endockscope acquired images of the same resolution and acceptable color resolution. When evaluated by expert endoscopists, the quality of the images overall were equivalent for flexible ureteroscopy and somewhat inferior, but still acceptable for flexible cystoscopy.
Authors: John McManus; Jose Salinas; Melinda Morton; Charles Lappan; Ron Poropatich Journal: Prehosp Disaster Med Date: 2008 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.040
Authors: Elizabeth Blank; Charles Lappan; Philip J Belmont; M Shaun Machen; James Ficke; Richard Pope; Brett D Owens Journal: J Surg Orthop Adv Date: 2011
Authors: Michael J Ackerman; Rosemarie Filart; Lawrence P Burgess; Insup Lee; Ronald K Poropatich Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: U W Thomale; T Knitter; A Schaumann; S A Ahmadi; P Ziegler; M Schulz; C Miethke Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Federico Gheza; Fadekemi O Oginni; Simone Crivellaro; Mario A Masrur; Adewale O Adisa Journal: World J Surg Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Shlomi Tapiero; Renai Yoon; Francis Jefferson; John Sung; Luke Limfueco; Courtney Cottone; Sherry Lu; Roshan M Patel; Jaime Landman; Ralph V Clayman Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-10-09 Impact factor: 4.226