Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision: An in Vitro Study

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)523-528
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Endourology
Volume32
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2018

Fingerprint

Elapidae
Light
Low Vision
Kidney Calculi
Urinary Tract
In Vitro Techniques
Hemorrhage
Carcinoma
Therapeutics
Urologists
Conservative Treatment
Surgeons

Keywords

  • digital ureterorenoscope
  • endourology
  • flexible ureterorenoscope
  • image definition
  • quality of vision
  • vision

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Talso, M., Proietti, S., Emiliani, E., Gallioli, A., Dragos, L., Orosa, A., ... Traxer, O. (2018). Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision: An in Vitro Study. Journal of Endourology, 32(6), 523-528. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0838

Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision : An in Vitro Study. / Talso, Michele; Proietti, Silvia; Emiliani, Esteban; Gallioli, Andrea; Dragos, Laurian; Orosa, Andrea; Servian, Pol; Barreiro, Aaron; Giusti, Guido; Montanari, Emanuele; Somani, Bhaskar; Traxer, Olivier.

In: Journal of Endourology, Vol. 32, No. 6, 01.06.2018, p. 523-528.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Talso, M, Proietti, S, Emiliani, E, Gallioli, A, Dragos, L, Orosa, A, Servian, P, Barreiro, A, Giusti, G, Montanari, E, Somani, B & Traxer, O 2018, 'Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision: An in Vitro Study', Journal of Endourology, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 523-528. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0838
Talso M, Proietti S, Emiliani E, Gallioli A, Dragos L, Orosa A et al. Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision: An in Vitro Study. Journal of Endourology. 2018 Jun 1;32(6):523-528. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0838
Talso, Michele ; Proietti, Silvia ; Emiliani, Esteban ; Gallioli, Andrea ; Dragos, Laurian ; Orosa, Andrea ; Servian, Pol ; Barreiro, Aaron ; Giusti, Guido ; Montanari, Emanuele ; Somani, Bhaskar ; Traxer, Olivier. / Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision : An in Vitro Study. In: Journal of Endourology. 2018 ; Vol. 32, No. 6. pp. 523-528.
@article{58a47cd624224303ad0ec84ffe10873d,
title = "Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision: An in Vitro Study",
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.",
keywords = "digital ureterorenoscope, endourology, flexible ureterorenoscope, image definition, quality of vision, vision",
author = "Michele Talso and Silvia Proietti and Esteban Emiliani and Andrea Gallioli and Laurian Dragos and Andrea Orosa and Pol Servian and Aaron Barreiro and Guido Giusti and Emanuele Montanari and Bhaskar Somani and Olivier Traxer",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1089/end.2017.0838",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "523--528",
journal = "Journal of Endourology",
issn = "0892-7790",
publisher = "Mary Ann Liebert Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of Flexible Ureterorenoscope Quality of Vision

T2 - An in Vitro Study

AU - Talso, Michele

AU - Proietti, Silvia

AU - Emiliani, Esteban

AU - Gallioli, Andrea

AU - Dragos, Laurian

AU - Orosa, Andrea

AU - Servian, Pol

AU - Barreiro, Aaron

AU - Giusti, Guido

AU - Montanari, Emanuele

AU - Somani, Bhaskar

AU - Traxer, Olivier

PY - 2018/6/1

Y1 - 2018/6/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - digital ureterorenoscope

KW - endourology

KW - flexible ureterorenoscope

KW - image definition

KW - quality of vision

KW - vision

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048520901&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85048520901&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1089/end.2017.0838

DO - 10.1089/end.2017.0838

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85048520901

VL - 32

SP - 523

EP - 528

JO - Journal of Endourology

JF - Journal of Endourology

SN - 0892-7790

IS - 6

ER -