Robert I Carey1, Christopher J Martin2, Jacob R Knego2. 1. Florida State University College of Medicine, Sarasota, FL. Electronic address: ricarey@juno.com. 2. Florida State University College of Medicine, Sarasota, FL.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the durability and cost of maintenance for outsourced, refurbished flexible ureteroscopes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ureteroscope usage and repair were prospectively recorded over a 365-day period at a large 836-bed public hospital. Cases were performed by 14 different urologists using either refurbished DUR-8 or DUR-8 Elite model ureteroscopes. Retrograde cases involving calculi, urothelial carcinoma, stricture, and diagnostic evaluations were included. Ureteroscope repairs were performed by a single outsourced repair vendor, not the original manufacturer. RESULTS: A total of 501 ureteroscopic cases involving 550 ureteroscope usages were performed over a 365-day period. Semirigid ureteroscopes were used for 281 (56.1%) cases and refurbished flexible ureteroscopes for 220 (43.9%). The reason for the ureteroscopy was calculi in 386 (77.0%) cases, urothelial carcinoma in 32 (6.4%), stricture in 36 (7.2%), and diagnostic in 47 (9.4%). No repairs were needed during this period for semirigid scopes. Ureteral access sheaths were used in 82 (37.7%) of the cases. A total of 32 instances of catastrophic breakage occurred. Each newly refurbished ureteroscope was used for an average of 6.9 times before incurring further damage requiring repair. CONCLUSION: Refurbished flexible ureteroscopes that have undergone comprehensive repair are extremely fragile in the setting of multiple surgeon users in a large public hospital that uses central processing for sterilization and storage. This poor durability results in significant maintenance, repair, and administrative inconvenience that should be considered along with the purchase price.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the durability and cost of maintenance for outsourced, refurbished flexible ureteroscopes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ureteroscope usage and repair were prospectively recorded over a 365-day period at a large 836-bed public hospital. Cases were performed by 14 different urologists using either refurbished DUR-8 or DUR-8 Elite model ureteroscopes. Retrograde cases involving calculi, urothelial carcinoma, stricture, and diagnostic evaluations were included. Ureteroscope repairs were performed by a single outsourced repair vendor, not the original manufacturer. RESULTS: A total of 501 ureteroscopic cases involving 550 ureteroscope usages were performed over a 365-day period. Semirigid ureteroscopes were used for 281 (56.1%) cases and refurbished flexible ureteroscopes for 220 (43.9%). The reason for the ureteroscopy was calculi in 386 (77.0%) cases, urothelial carcinoma in 32 (6.4%), stricture in 36 (7.2%), and diagnostic in 47 (9.4%). No repairs were needed during this period for semirigid scopes. Ureteral access sheaths were used in 82 (37.7%) of the cases. A total of 32 instances of catastrophic breakage occurred. Each newly refurbished ureteroscope was used for an average of 6.9 times before incurring further damage requiring repair. CONCLUSION: Refurbished flexible ureteroscopes that have undergone comprehensive repair are extremely fragile in the setting of multiple surgeon users in a large public hospital that uses central processing for sterilization and storage. This poor durability results in significant maintenance, repair, and administrative inconvenience that should be considered along with the purchase price.
Authors: Manint Usawachintachit; Dylan S Isaacson; Kazumi Taguchi; David T Tzou; Ryan S Hsi; Benjamin A Sherer; Marshall L Stoller; Thomas Chi Journal: J Endourol Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Kazumi Taguchi; Jonathan D Harper; Marshall L Stoller; Brian D Duty; Mathew D Sorensen; Roger L Sur; Manint Usawachintachit; David T Tzou; David L Wenzler; Dylan Isaacson; Angela Xu; Carissa Chu; Uwais B Zaid; Eric R Taylor; Krishna Ramaswamy; Thomas Chi Journal: Urolithiasis Date: 2017-12-09 Impact factor: 3.436
Authors: Saeed H Al Qahtani; Mohamed H Abdelhamied; Abdulrahman H AlMuhrij; Mizyad Y Al Rawashada; Ahmed M Al Askar; Amr M Abdelhamid; Tarek K Fath El-Bab; Ehab M Galal; Mahmoud S Eladawy Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-05-13 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Ahmed I Ali; Amr Eldakhakhny; Abdelsalam Abdelfadel; Mahmoud F Rohiem; Mohamed Elbadry; Ali Hassan Journal: World J Urol Date: 2022-07-27 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Steeve Doizi; Guido Kamphuis; Guido Giusti; Kim Hovgaard Andreassen; Thomas Knoll; Palle Jörn Osther; Cesare Scoffone; Daniel Pérez-Fentes; Silvia Proietti; Oliver Wiseman; Jean de la Rosette; Olivier Traxer Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-09-26 Impact factor: 4.226