MP51-03 COMPARISON OF A NEW SINGLE-USE DIGITAL FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPE (LITHOVUE TM ) TO A NON-DISPOSABLE FIBRE-OPTIC FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPE IN A LIVE PORCINE MODEL (2016)

You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: Surgical Therapy V1 Apr 2016MP51-03 COMPARISON OF A NEW SINGLE-USE DIGITAL FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPE (LITHOVUE TM) TO A NON-DISPOSABLE FIBRE-OPTIC FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPE IN A LIVE PORCINE MODEL Oliver Wiseman, Francis Keeley, Olivier Traxer, Guido Giusti, Michael Lipkin, and Glenn Preminger Oliver WisemanOliver Wiseman More articles by this author , Francis KeeleyFrancis Keeley More articles by this author , Olivier TraxerOlivier Traxer More articles by this author , Guido GiustiGuido Giusti More articles by this author , Michael LipkinMichael Lipkin More articles by this author , and Glenn PremingerGlenn Preminger More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.458AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES LithoVue TM is a new single use digital flexible ureteroscope. The aim of this study was to evaluate it compared to a standard fibre-optic flexible ureteroscope, with respect to image quality and maneuverability within a live porcine renal collecting system. METHODS Flexible ureteroscopy was performed in three anaesthetised pigs by six experienced endourologists using fluoroscopic guidance and standard techniques with the Boston Scientific LithoVue TM disposable digital flexible ureteroscope and compared to an Olympus P5 TM fiber optic flexible ureteroscope. Each operator operated on one kidney, and attempted to access all areas of the collecting system either by accessing the kidney over a wire of via and access sheath or both. Passage of a 1.9Fr Escape TM or 1.9 or 3 Fr Fr Zero-tip TM basket and a 200 micron TracTip TM or Flexiva TM laser fibre was undertaken, and effect on deflection and visibility noted. Users were asked standard questions on completion, and also rated image quality of the LithoVue TM system compared to the P5. RESULTS All operators were able to access all areas of the collecting system, and complete the schedule of tasks including passage of the basket and laser fibre through the ureteroscope. Ureteroscope set up and use, access and navigation, image quality, field of view, depth of field, and lithotripsy compatibility were all rated as clinically acceptable. All operators answered the statement ′ The user was able to access, visualize, diagnose, and aid on the treatment of stones and conditions in the kidney, ureter and bladder better thanks or equal to the standard of care amongst current flexible ureteroscopes′ positively. When asked to compare the image quality of the LithoVue TM to the P5 TM, on a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 is superior P5 TM performance, 4 is similar performance, and 7 is superior LithoVue TM performance, operators gave a median score of 7, with a mean score of 6.86. CONCLUSIONS The LithoVue TM single-use digital flexible ureteroscope gives excellent views of the collecting system when compared to a P5 TM fibre-optic ureteroscope and is able to access all calyces in a porcine model, without significant loss of deflection or visibility with passage of a laser fibre or 1.9Fr basket. Further studies in humans are needed to determine the clinical utility of this new ureteroscope. © 2016FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 4SApril 2016Page: e682 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016MetricsAuthor Information Oliver Wiseman More articles by this author Francis Keeley More articles by this author Olivier Traxer More articles by this author Guido Giusti More articles by this author Michael Lipkin More articles by this author Glenn Preminger More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...