TY - JOUR
T1 - Critical analysis of the miniaturized stone basket
T2 - Effect on deflection and flow rate
AU - Magheli, Ahmed
AU - Semins, Michelle Jo
AU - Allaf, Mohamad E.
AU - Matlaga, Brian R.
PY - 2012/3/1
Y1 - 2012/3/1
N2 - Background and Purpose: As surgical technology continues to advance, stone baskets are becoming increasingly miniaturized. We performed a study to define the effect of miniaturized stone baskets on ureteroscope irrigation flow and deflection. Materials and Methods: We compared the three smallest available stone baskets: Boston Scientific 1.3F OptiFlex, Cook 1.5F N-Circle, and Sacred Heart 1.5F Halo, measuring their effect on irrigant flow and deflection of three flexible ureteroscopes. Results: All devices adversely affected irrigation flow and active deflection of all of the ureteroscopes (P<0.05). The 1.3F device, however, exhibited significantly less of an effect on both parameters. Irrigation flow was 28% greater with the 1.3F device than it was for the 1.5F devices. The device's effect on active deflection was 43% less with the 1.3F device than it was for the 1.5F devices. Conclusion: Any device placed through the working channel of a ureteroscope will have a deleterious effect on the ureteroscope's irrigant flow and active deflection. As the caliber of the device decreases, however, its effect on these parameters appears to be reduced. Our present data suggest that the 1.3F basket has significantly less of an effect on both the irrigant flow and deflection of a flexible ureteroscope than do the 1.5F devices.
AB - Background and Purpose: As surgical technology continues to advance, stone baskets are becoming increasingly miniaturized. We performed a study to define the effect of miniaturized stone baskets on ureteroscope irrigation flow and deflection. Materials and Methods: We compared the three smallest available stone baskets: Boston Scientific 1.3F OptiFlex, Cook 1.5F N-Circle, and Sacred Heart 1.5F Halo, measuring their effect on irrigant flow and deflection of three flexible ureteroscopes. Results: All devices adversely affected irrigation flow and active deflection of all of the ureteroscopes (P<0.05). The 1.3F device, however, exhibited significantly less of an effect on both parameters. Irrigation flow was 28% greater with the 1.3F device than it was for the 1.5F devices. The device's effect on active deflection was 43% less with the 1.3F device than it was for the 1.5F devices. Conclusion: Any device placed through the working channel of a ureteroscope will have a deleterious effect on the ureteroscope's irrigant flow and active deflection. As the caliber of the device decreases, however, its effect on these parameters appears to be reduced. Our present data suggest that the 1.3F basket has significantly less of an effect on both the irrigant flow and deflection of a flexible ureteroscope than do the 1.5F devices.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857848975&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857848975&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1089/end.2011.0166
DO - 10.1089/end.2011.0166
M3 - Article
C2 - 22022885
AN - SCOPUS:84857848975
SN - 0892-7790
VL - 26
SP - 275
EP - 277
JO - Journal of Endourology
JF - Journal of Endourology
IS - 3
ER -