Single-use flexible ureteroscopes: practice patterns, attitudes, and preferences for next-generation concepts

被引:0
|
作者
Salka, Bassel [1 ]
Bahaee, Jamsheed [2 ]
DiBianco, John Michael [3 ]
Plott, Jeff [4 ]
Ghani, Khurshid R. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Med Sch, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] Cleveland Clin Akron, Gen Urol & Pelv Hlth Ctr, Akron, OH USA
[3] Univ Florida, Dept Urol, Gainesville, FL USA
[4] Univ Michigan, Dept Biomed Engn, Coulter Program, Ann Arbor, MI USA
[5] Univ Michigan, Dept Urol, Ann Arbor, MI USA
来源
FRONTIERS IN SURGERY | 2024年 / 11卷
关键词
single use; ureteroscopy; urolithiasis; technology; survey; DURABILITY;
D O I
10.3389/fsurg.2024.1419682
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Single use flexible ureteroscopes (su-fURS) have emerged as an alternative to reusable flexible ureteroscopes (r-fURS) for the management of upper urinary tract calculi. However, little is known about urologist usage and attitudes about this technology. Through a worldwide survey of endourologists, we assessed practice patterns and preferences for su-fURS. Methods: An online questionnaire was sent to Endourology Society members in January 2021. The survey explored current su-fURS practice patterns, reasons for/against adoption, and preferences for next generation models including developments in imaging, intra-renal pressure, heat generation, and suction. Responses were collected through QualtricsXM over a 1-month period from surgeons in North America, Latin America, Europe, Asia, Africa, and Oceania. The study was conducted according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). Results: 208 (13.9%) members responded to the survey. Most respondents (53.8%) performed >100 ureteroscopies per year. 77.9% of all respondents used su-fURS for less than half of all procedures while only 2.4% used su-fURS for every procedure. 26.0% had never used a su-fURS. Overall, usage was not influenced by a surgeon's geographic region, practice environment, or years of experience. Top reasons for not adopting su-fURS were cost (59.1%) and environmental impact (12.5%). The most desired improvements in design were smaller outer shaft size (19.4%), improved optics and vision (15.9%), and wireless connectivity (13.6%). For next generation concepts, the functions most commonly described as essential or important by respondents was the ability to suction fragments (94.3%) while the function most commonly noted as not important or unnecessary was incorporation of a temperature sensor (40.4%). Conclusions: su-fURS are not commonly used, even among urologists who perform a high number of fURS. The primary concern for adoption is cost and environmental impact. Suction capability was considered the most important future development.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] TAKING ADVANTAGE OF SINGLE-USE FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPES: TECHNIQUES OF FORCED TIP DEFLECTION AND FORCED TORQUE
    Keller, Etienne Xavier
    De Coninck, Vincent
    Rodriguez-Monsalve, Maria
    Dragos, Laurian
    Doizi, Steeve
    Traxer, Olivier
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : E918 - E918
  • [22] Durability of the Next-generation Flexible Fiberoptic Ureteroscopes: A Randomized Prospective Multi-institutional Clinical Trial
    Knudsen, Bodo
    Miyaoka, Ricardo
    Shah, Ketul
    Holden, Timothy
    Turk, Thomas M. T.
    Pedro, Renato N.
    Kriedberg, Carly
    Hinck, Bryan
    Ortiz-Alvarado, Omar
    Monga, Manoj
    UROLOGY, 2010, 75 (03) : 534 - 538
  • [23] DURABILITY OF THE NEXT-GENERATION FLEXIBLE FIBEROPTIC URETEROSCOPES: A RANDOMIZED PROSPECTIVE MULTI-INSTITUTIONAL CLINICAL TRIAL
    Knudsen, B.
    Miyaoka, R.
    Shah, K.
    Turk, T.
    Pedro, R.
    Monga, M.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2009, 23 : A19 - A19
  • [24] Editorial Comment: Single-use flexible ureteroscopes: update and perspective in developing countries. A narrative review
    Marroig, Bruno
    INTERNATIONAL BRAZ J UROL, 2022, 48 (03): : 468 - 470
  • [25] In Vitro Evaluation of Single-Use Digital Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Practical Comparison for a Patient-Centered Approach
    Marchini, Giovanni Scala
    Batagello, Carlos A.
    Monga, Manoj
    Miranda Torricelli, Fabio Cesar
    Vicentini, Fabio C.
    Danilovic, Alexandre
    Srougi, Miguel
    Nahas, Willian C.
    Mazzucchi, Eduardo
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2018, 32 (03) : 184 - 191
  • [26] IN VITRO EVALUATION OF SINGLE-USE DIGITAL FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPES: A PRACTICAL COMPARISON FOR A PATIENT-CENTERED APPROACH
    Marchini, Giovanni
    Batagello, Carlos
    Monga, Manoj
    Torricelli, Fabio
    Vicentini, Fabio
    Danilovic, Alexandre
    Srougi, Miguel
    Nahas, William
    Mazzucchi, Eduardo
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 199 (04): : E473 - E474
  • [27] Use of next-generation sequencing in daily routine practice
    Pluzanski, Adam
    Tysarowski, Andrzej
    Kawecki, Maciej
    Kucharz, Jakub
    Winiarczyk, Kinga
    Krzakowski, Maciej
    ONCOLOGY IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2023, 19 (06): : 419 - 426
  • [28] Durability of the Next-generation Flexible Fiberoptic Ureteroscopes: A Randomized Prospective Multi-institutional Clinical Trial COMMENT
    Chew, Ben H.
    UROLOGY, 2010, 75 (03) : 538 - 538
  • [29] Durability of the Next-generation Flexible Fiberoptic Ureteroscopes: A Randomized Prospective Multi-institutional Clinical Trial REPLY
    Monga, Manoj
    UROLOGY, 2010, 75 (03) : 539 - 539
  • [30] Characteristics of current digital single-use flexible ureteroscopes versus their reusable counterparts: an in-vitro comparative analysis
    Dragos, Laurian B.
    Somani, Bhaskar K.
    Keller, Etienne X.
    De Coninck, Vincent M. J.
    Herrero, Maria Rodriguez-Monsalve
    Kamphuis, Guido M.
    Bres-Niewada, Ewa
    Sener, Emre T.
    Doizi, Steeve
    Wiseman, Oliver J.
    Traxer, Olivier
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2019, 8 : S359 - S370