Literature DB >> 25661780

New ureteral access sheaths: a double standard.

Shubha De1, Carl Sarkissian1, Fabio C M Torricelli1, Robert Brown1, Manoj Monga2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the functional characteristics of the traditional and new single-wire ureteral access sheath (UAS) configurations relating to insertion, positioning, tissue injury, and durability.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four UAS were tested: Navigator HD (11/13F, Boston Scientific), Re-Trace (10/12F, Coloplast), Flexor-Parallel (P), and Flexor-Regular (R; 9.5/11.5F, Cook Medical). UASs were evaluated for sharpness-(1) foil perforation, (2) tissue skiving (advancing sheath/dilator against fixed foil or bologna models); rigidity-(3) tip bending, (4) sheath buckling; (5) lubricity (dynamic friction through bologna), (6) dilator removal force, (7) kinking forces (side wall compressive forces), and (8) radiopacity. New UASs were used for each trial. A motorized sliding stage was used, and continuous force measurements were recorded with a Mark-10 digital force gauge.
RESULTS: The Navigator HD had the largest external diameter (13.02F). Re-Trace had the longest (51 mm) and most flexible tip (0.942 lb, P <.001). Flexor-R had the shortest (23.2 mm) and stiffest tip (7.48 lb). The Cook tip perforation forces were highest (0.807 lb), whereas the sheath required the most force (0.25 lb, P <.001) and caused the least damage (4.95 mm) when advanced against tissue. Navigator HD had the least frictional resistance (0.14 lb, P <.001). The single-wire systems had the lowest buckling forces (Navigator HD, 0.41 lb; Flexor-R, 0.827 lb; Flexor-P, 0.445 lb; Re-Trace, 1.014 lb; P <.001) and the highest dilator removal forces compared with classic systems (Flexor-P, 1.39 lb; Re-Trace, 1.9 lb; Navigator HD, 0.190 lb; Flexor-R, 0.194 lb; P <.001). The differences in kinking forces and radiopacity were not significant.
CONCLUSION: The Navigator HD was the most slippery and rigid sheath, whereas the single-wire systems had lower buckling forces and required more force to remove their dilators. Cook sheaths appeared the least traumatic.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25661780     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.07.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  4 in total

Review 1.  Use of ureteral access sheaths in ureteroscopy.

Authors:  Adam G Kaplan; Michael E Lipkin; Charles D Scales; Glenn M Preminger
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 2.  The Single Wire Ureteral Access Sheath, Both Safe and Economical.

Authors:  Joan C Delto; George Wayne; Ajaydeep Sidhu; Rafael Yanes; Akshay Bhandari; Alan M Nieder
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2016-11-15

3.  Ureteral access sheaths: a comprehensive comparison of physical and mechanical properties.

Authors:  Nishant Patel; Manoj Monga
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2018 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 4.  Prevention strategies for ureteral stricture following ureteroscopic lithotripsy.

Authors:  Hao Dong; Yonghan Peng; Ling Li; Xiaofeng Gao
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2017-09-22
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.