BACKGROUND: Flexible ureteroscopy is an established treatment modality for evaluating and treating abnormalities in the upper urinary tract. Reusable ureteroscope (USC) durability is a significant concern. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the durability of the latest generation of digital and fiber optic reusable flexible USCs and the factors affecting it. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Six new flexible USCs from Olympus and Karl Storz were included. The primary endpoint for each USC was its first repair. Data on patient and treatment characteristics, accessory device use, ureteroscopy time, image quality, USC handling, disinfection cycles, type of damage, and deflection loss were collected prospectively. INTERVENTION: Ureteroscopy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: USC durability was measured as the total number of uses and ureteroscopy time before repair. USC handling and image quality were scored. After every procedure, maximal ventral and dorsal USC deflection were documented on digital images. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 198 procedures were performed. The median number of procedures was 27 (IQR 16-48; 14h) for the six USCs overall, 27 (IQR 20-56; 14h) for the digital USCs, and 24 (range 10-37; 14h) for the fiber optic USCs. Image quality remained high throughout the study for all six USCs. USC handling and the range of deflection remained good under incremental use. Damage to the distal part of the shaft and shaft coating was the most frequent reason for repair, and was related to intraoperative manual forcing. A limitation of this study is its single-center design. CONCLUSIONS: The durability of the latest reusable flexible USCs in the current study was limited to 27 uses (14h). Damage to the flexible shaft was the most important limitation to the durability of the USCs evaluated. Prevention of intraoperative manual forcing of flexible USCs maximizes their overall durability. PATIENT SUMMARY: Current flexible ureteroscopes proved to be durable. Shaft vulnerability was the most important limiting factor affecting durability.
BACKGROUND: Flexible ureteroscopy is an established treatment modality for evaluating and treating abnormalities in the upper urinary tract. Reusable ureteroscope (USC) durability is a significant concern. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the durability of the latest generation of digital and fiber optic reusable flexible USCs and the factors affecting it. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Six new flexible USCs from Olympus and Karl Storz were included. The primary endpoint for each USC was its first repair. Data on patient and treatment characteristics, accessory device use, ureteroscopy time, image quality, USC handling, disinfection cycles, type of damage, and deflection loss were collected prospectively. INTERVENTION: Ureteroscopy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: USC durability was measured as the total number of uses and ureteroscopy time before repair. USC handling and image quality were scored. After every procedure, maximal ventral and dorsal USC deflection were documented on digital images. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 198 procedures were performed. The median number of procedures was 27 (IQR 16-48; 14h) for the six USCs overall, 27 (IQR 20-56; 14h) for the digital USCs, and 24 (range 10-37; 14h) for the fiber optic USCs. Image quality remained high throughout the study for all six USCs. USC handling and the range of deflection remained good under incremental use. Damage to the distal part of the shaft and shaft coating was the most frequent reason for repair, and was related to intraoperative manual forcing. A limitation of this study is its single-center design. CONCLUSIONS: The durability of the latest reusable flexible USCs in the current study was limited to 27 uses (14h). Damage to the flexible shaft was the most important limitation to the durability of the USCs evaluated. Prevention of intraoperative manual forcing of flexible USCs maximizes their overall durability. PATIENT SUMMARY: Current flexible ureteroscopes proved to be durable. Shaft vulnerability was the most important limiting factor affecting durability.
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: Giorgio Bozzini; Beatrice Filippi; Sulieman Alriyalat; Alberto Calori; Umberto Besana; Alexander Mueller; Dmitri Pushkar; Javier Romero-Otero; Antonio Pastore; Maria Chiara Sighinolfi; Salvatore Micali; Carlo Buizza; Bernardo Rocco Journal: Res Rep Urol Date: 2021-02-10
Authors: Maximilian Eisel; Frank Strittmatter; Stephan Ströbl; Christian Freymüller; Thomas Pongratz; Ronald Sroka Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-03-30 Impact factor: 4.379