Durability of the Next-generation Flexible Fiberoptic Ureteroscopes: A Randomized Prospective Multi-institutional Clinical Trial

Knudsen, Bodo E.; Miyaoka, Ricardo; Shah, Ketul; Holden, Timothy R.; Türk, Thomas; Pedro, Renato N.; Kriedberg, Carly; Hinck, Bryan; Ortiz-Alvarado, Omar; Monga, Manoj

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2009.06.093

Cited by 93 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The need for scope replacement, maintenance, and repair is one area that has been studied with regard to flexible ureteroscope usage. 19,20 Regarding failure of LithoVue, we experienced five occurrences of scope failure intraoperatively. The overall LithoVue failure rate of 4.4% was comparable with that of our reusable ureteroscopes (7.7%) and consistent with recent failure rates reported in the literature for reusable ureteroscopes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The overall LithoVue failure rate of 4.4% was comparable with that of our reusable ureteroscopes (7.7%) and consistent with recent failure rates reported in the literature for reusable ureteroscopes. 3,4,19 In addition, limited studies regarding cost analysis for disposable scopes have been performed, 21 indicating that these scopes may be comparable in cost-effectiveness with reusable scopes. Both the questions of qualitative and cost benefits for LithoVue are of interest, but beyond the scope of the current study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Prospective Case–Control Study Comparing LithoVue, a Single-Use, Flexible Disposable Ureteroscope, with Flexible, Reusable Fiber-Optic Ureteroscopes

Usawachintachit

Isaacson

Taguchi

et al. 2017

Journal of Endourology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: LithoVueÔ is a novel, single-use, digital flexible ureteroscope that was released to the US market in January 2016. There are scant data regarding its performance in humans. Procedural outcomes comparing LithoVue with reusable ureteroscopes are presented in patients undergoing ureteroscopy for upper urinary tract pathology. Patients and Methods: Clinical outcomes between two groups of patients undergoing flexible ureteroscopy for upper urinary tract pathology were analyzed. The first group underwent surgery utilizing LithoVue, and the second group used reusable fiber-optic flexible ureteroscopes. Differences in procedural outcomes, operative times, and time spent in hospital were analyzed using two-tailed t-tests and chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Results: One hundred fifteen cases utilizing LithoVue and 65 cases utilizing reusable ureteroscopes were included in this study. Demographics, surgical indications, stone size, location, total stone burden, composition, procedural outcomes, and complications were comparable between groups. For all cases, LithoVue procedures lasted 54.1 -25.7 minutes compared with 64.5 -37.0 minutes for reusable scope procedures ( p < 0.05) and for stone removal cases, 57.3 -25.1 vs 70.3 -36.9 minutes, respectively ( p < 0.05). Scope failure occurred in 4.4% of LithoVue cases and 7.7% of reusable cases ( p = 0.27). Conclusions: LithoVue represents a feasible alternative to reusable ureteroscopes with a low rate of scope failure comparable with reusable ureteroscopes. Its use shortens procedure duration, a finding that warrants further investigation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Prospective Case–Control Study Comparing LithoVue, a Single-Use, Flexible Disposable Ureteroscope, with Flexible, Reusable Fiber-Optic Ureteroscopes

Usawachintachit

Isaacson

Taguchi

et al. 2017

Journal of Endourology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our first repair times were 54 and 51 cases for Flex-X2 TM and Cobra vision TM , respectively, which are consistent with several prior studies. In various studies, repair rates have been reported to be between 5.3-109 and 11-100 cases for fiberoptic and digital flexible ureteroscopes respectively [15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. However, longer durable periods, in previous reports, could be due to the inclusion of both diagnostic and therapeutic interventions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fiberoptic versus Digital: A Comparison of Durability and Cost Effectiveness of the Two Flexible Ureteroscopes

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: We aimed to evaluate the durability and cost effectiveness of the latest digital flexible ureterescope by comparing it with the conventional fiberoptic one. Materials and Methods: Data of patients who underwent retrograde intrarenal surgery between January 2013 and December 2014 were collected. Fiberoptic Flex-X2 or digital Cobra vision flexible ureteroscopes were used for the procedures. The comparison of both ureteroscopes was performed in terms of patient and stone characteristics, operative outcomes, durability, and cost effectiveness. Results: A total of 105 patients were evaluated for the study. The patient and stone characteristics and operative outcomes were similar between the groups. Overall, 54 and 51 procedures were performed using Flex-X2 and Cobra vision, respectively, before they were sent for renovation. The purchase prices were USD 29,500 for Flex-X2 and USD 58,000 for Cobra vision. Costs of per case were determined as USD 549.29 for Flex-X2 and as USD 1,137.25 for Cobra vision. Per minute working time costs were USD 772.04 and 1,471.33 for Flex-X2 and Cobra vision respectively. Conclusions: The digital Cobra vision has high costs without any difference in durability as compared to Flex-X2. Moreover, it has no benefit over Flex-X2 in terms of surgical outcomes.

show abstract

“…Fiberoptic fURS repair rates range from 5.3 to 100 cases depending on the scope model and institution. [8][9][10] Digital fURS repair rates vary as well from as low as every 11 cases to over 100. [11][12][13] There are many potential explanations for such wide discrepancies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive Costs Associated with Fiberoptic and Digital Flexible Ureteroscopes at a High Volume Teaching Hospital

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Durability of the Next-generation Flexible Fiberoptic Ureteroscopes: A Randomized Prospective Multi-institutional Clinical Trial

Cited by 93 publications

References 17 publications

A Prospective Case–Control Study Comparing LithoVue, a Single-Use, Flexible Disposable Ureteroscope, with Flexible, Reusable Fiber-Optic Ureteroscopes

A Prospective Case–Control Study Comparing LithoVue, a Single-Use, Flexible Disposable Ureteroscope, with Flexible, Reusable Fiber-Optic Ureteroscopes

Fiberoptic versus Digital: A Comparison of Durability and Cost Effectiveness of the Two Flexible Ureteroscopes

Comprehensive Costs Associated with Fiberoptic and Digital Flexible Ureteroscopes at a High Volume Teaching Hospital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About