The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscope quality of vision: an in vitro study

Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscope quality of vision: an in vitro study
Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscope quality of vision: an in vitro study

INTRODUCTION: Flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS) is one of the best solutions for treatment of renal calculi <2 cm and for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma conservative treatment. An adequate quality of vision is mandatory to help surgeon get better outcomes. No studies have been done, to our knowledge, about what fURS in the market has the best quality of vision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven different fURS were used to compare the image quality (Lithovue, Olympus V, Olympus V2, Storz Flex XC-in White Light and in Clara+Chroma mode-Wolf Cobra Vision, Olympus P6, and Storx Flex X2). Two standardized grids to evaluate contrast and image definition and three stones of different composition were filmed in four standardized different scenarios. These videos were shown to 103 subjects (51 urologists and 52 nonurologists) who had to evaluate them with a rating scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).

RESULTS: No difference in terms of scores was observed for sex of the participants. Digital (D) ureterorenoscopes were rated better than fiber optics (FOs) ureterorenoscopes. Overall, Flex XC White Light and XC Clara+Chroma image quality resulted steadily better than other fURS (p < 0.0001). Olympus V generally provided a vision better than Lithovue. Cobra Vision and Olympus V2 had superimposable values that were significantly lower than Lithovue's ones. Olympus P6 and Storz X2 offered a low quality of vision compared to the others. In the medium simulating bleeding, Olympus V and V2 significantly improved their scores of 12% and 8.1%, contrary to rest of the ureterorenoscopes.

CONCLUSION: D ureterorenoscopes have a better image quality than FO ones. The only disposable ureterorenoscope tested was comparable to the majority of other D ureterorenoscopes. The best image quality was provided by Storz D ureterorenoscopes, being Clara Chroma the favorite Spies Mode, according to literature.

0892-7790
523-528
Talso, Michele
ca6d9514-cc0d-483e-88e3-e5c0dce66427
Proietti, Silvia
7f914fa5-58b1-4a55-9a48-4c995d26f512
Emiliani, Esteban
aa8ffdc6-c992-48e4-8623-454e015a3812
Gallioli, Andrea
08c9a135-13a3-41b5-b92b-3244fce49167
Dragos, Laurian
abd83e0d-c173-42c7-b457-d1a876775668
Orosa, Andrea
6c5bcdb0-e341-4e21-9462-876357edd1a9
Servian, Pol
9895c1fd-66d0-4a66-928d-b49aa1a222f7
Barreiro, Aaron
726b9042-c26e-4ab5-af8f-206db785f31f
Giusti, Guido
d91eda0c-524b-403a-801b-f1412a3bad62
Montanari, Emanuele
533c3f79-5c7e-4d74-ada7-293bf736003f
Somani, Bhaskar
7ed77b4e-3ffc-43ef-bc61-bd1c1544518c
Traxer, Olivier
2fa78817-b6f8-4f00-b389-c9c9ddbd01f3
Talso, Michele
ca6d9514-cc0d-483e-88e3-e5c0dce66427
Proietti, Silvia
7f914fa5-58b1-4a55-9a48-4c995d26f512
Emiliani, Esteban
aa8ffdc6-c992-48e4-8623-454e015a3812
Gallioli, Andrea
08c9a135-13a3-41b5-b92b-3244fce49167
Dragos, Laurian
abd83e0d-c173-42c7-b457-d1a876775668
Orosa, Andrea
6c5bcdb0-e341-4e21-9462-876357edd1a9
Servian, Pol
9895c1fd-66d0-4a66-928d-b49aa1a222f7
Barreiro, Aaron
726b9042-c26e-4ab5-af8f-206db785f31f
Giusti, Guido
d91eda0c-524b-403a-801b-f1412a3bad62
Montanari, Emanuele
533c3f79-5c7e-4d74-ada7-293bf736003f
Somani, Bhaskar
7ed77b4e-3ffc-43ef-bc61-bd1c1544518c
Traxer, Olivier
2fa78817-b6f8-4f00-b389-c9c9ddbd01f3

Talso, Michele, Proietti, Silvia, Emiliani, Esteban, Gallioli, Andrea, Dragos, Laurian, Orosa, Andrea, Servian, Pol, Barreiro, Aaron, Giusti, Guido, Montanari, Emanuele, Somani, Bhaskar and Traxer, Olivier (2018) Comparison of flexible ureterorenoscope quality of vision: an in vitro study. Journal of Endourology, 32 (6), 523-528. (doi:10.1089/end.2017.0838).

Record type: Article

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS) is one of the best solutions for treatment of renal calculi <2 cm and for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma conservative treatment. An adequate quality of vision is mandatory to help surgeon get better outcomes. No studies have been done, to our knowledge, about what fURS in the market has the best quality of vision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven different fURS were used to compare the image quality (Lithovue, Olympus V, Olympus V2, Storz Flex XC-in White Light and in Clara+Chroma mode-Wolf Cobra Vision, Olympus P6, and Storx Flex X2). Two standardized grids to evaluate contrast and image definition and three stones of different composition were filmed in four standardized different scenarios. These videos were shown to 103 subjects (51 urologists and 52 nonurologists) who had to evaluate them with a rating scale from 1 (very bad) to 5 (very good).

RESULTS: No difference in terms of scores was observed for sex of the participants. Digital (D) ureterorenoscopes were rated better than fiber optics (FOs) ureterorenoscopes. Overall, Flex XC White Light and XC Clara+Chroma image quality resulted steadily better than other fURS (p < 0.0001). Olympus V generally provided a vision better than Lithovue. Cobra Vision and Olympus V2 had superimposable values that were significantly lower than Lithovue's ones. Olympus P6 and Storz X2 offered a low quality of vision compared to the others. In the medium simulating bleeding, Olympus V and V2 significantly improved their scores of 12% and 8.1%, contrary to rest of the ureterorenoscopes.

CONCLUSION: D ureterorenoscopes have a better image quality than FO ones. The only disposable ureterorenoscope tested was comparable to the majority of other D ureterorenoscopes. The best image quality was provided by Storz D ureterorenoscopes, being Clara Chroma the favorite Spies Mode, according to literature.

Text
Vision quality - PETRA - Accepted Manuscript
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 21 March 2018
e-pub ahead of print date: 24 April 2018
Published date: June 2018

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 420194
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/420194
ISSN: 0892-7790
PURE UUID: 604c1912-d9da-44e4-b091-4921539ef05a

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 02 May 2018 16:30
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 06:34

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Michele Talso
Author: Silvia Proietti
Author: Esteban Emiliani
Author: Andrea Gallioli
Author: Laurian Dragos
Author: Andrea Orosa
Author: Pol Servian
Author: Aaron Barreiro
Author: Guido Giusti
Author: Emanuele Montanari
Author: Bhaskar Somani
Author: Olivier Traxer

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×