How to evaluate a flexible ureterorenoscope? Systematic mapping of existing evaluation methods

Illumination matters part I: comparative analysis of light sources and illumination in flexible ureteroscopy-fundamental findings from a PEARLS analysis

PURPOSE

Illumination characteristics of flexible ureteroscopes have been evaluated in air, but not in saline, the native operative medium for endourology. The aim was to evaluate light properties of contemporary ureteroscopes in air versus saline, light distribution analysis, and color temperature.

METHODS

We evaluated the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, and OTU WiScope using a 3D printed black target board in-vitro model submerged in saline. A spectrometer was used for lux and color temperature measurements at different opening locations.

RESULTS

Illuminance was higher in saline compared to air (5679 vs. 5205 lx with Flex-Xc, p = 0.02). Illuminance in saline differed between ureteroscopes (ANOVA p < 0.001), with highest for the Flex-Xc at 100% brightness setting (5679 lx), followed by Pusen 9.2F (5280 lx), Flex-X2s (4613 lx), P7 (4371 lx), V3 (2374 lx), WiScope (582 lx) and finally Pusen 7.5F (255 lx). The same ranking was found at 50% brightness setting, with the highest ureteroscope illuminance value 34 times that of the scope with lowest illuminance. Most scopes had maximum illuminance off center, with skewness. Three scopes had two light sources, with one light source for all other scopes. Inter-scope comparisons revealed significant differences of color temperature (ANOVA p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates the presence of inhomogeneous light spread as well as large differences in illumination properties of ureteroscopes, possibly impacting on the performance of individual scopes in vivo. Additionally, the study suggests that future studies on illumination characteristics of flexible ureteroscopes should ideally be done in saline, and no longer in air.

Illumination matters Part II: advanced comparative analysis of flexible ureteroscopes in a kidney model by PEARLS

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to evaluate illumination properties in an in-vitro kidney calyx model in saline.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We evaluated a series of contemporary flexible ureteroscopes including the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, as well as OTU WiScope using a 3D-printed closed pink kidney calyx model, submerged in saline. A spectrometer was used for illuminance and color temperature measurements at different openings located at center (direct light), 45° (direct and indirect light) and 90°(indirect light) to the axis of the scope.

RESULTS

Maximum illuminance was at the center opening for all scopes (range: 284 to 12,058 lx at 50% brightness and 454 to 11,871 lx at 100% brightness settings). The scope with the highest center illuminance (Flex-Xc) was 26 times superior to the scope with the lowest illuminance (Pusen 7.5Fr) at 100% brightness setting. For each scope, there was a peripheral illuminance drop ranging from - 43 to - 92% at 50% brightness and - 43% to - 88% at 100% brightness settings, respectively (all p < 0.01). Highest drop was for the P7 and the Pusen 9.2F. All scopes had illuminance skew, except the V3. All scopes had a warm color temperature.

CONCLUSION

Illumination properties vary between ureteroscopes in an enclosed cavity in saline, and differs at center vs 45° and 90° positions within scopes. Peripheral illuminance drop can be as high as - 92%, which is undesirable. This may affect the choice of ureteroscope and light brightness settings used in surgery by urologists.

Illumination matters part IV: blackout and whiteout in flexible ureteroscopy - first report on a phenomenon observed by PEARLS

PURPOSE

To date, no study has evaluated effects of varying brightness settings on image quality from flexible ureteroscopes submerged in saline. The aim was to evaluate blackout and whiteout occurrences in an in-vitro kidney calyx model.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We evaluated a series of contemporary flexible ureteroscopes including the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, as well as OTU WiScope using a 3D-printed enclosed pink in-vitro kidney calyx model submerged in saline. Endoscopic images were captured with ureteroscope tip placed at 5 mm,10 mm and 20 mm distances. The complete range of brightness settings and video capture modes were evaluated for each scope. Distribution of brightness on a grayscale histogram of images was analyzed (scale range 0 to 255). Blackout and whiteout were defined as median histogram ranges from 0 to 35 and 220 to 255, respectively (monitor image too dark or too bright for the human eye, respectively).

RESULTS

Blackout occurred with the P7, Pusen 7.5F, 9.2F and WiScope at all distances, and V3 at 20 mm - with lowest brightness settings. Whiteout occurred with Flex-X2s, V3 and P7 at 5 mm and 10 mm, as well as with V3 and P7 at 20 mm - mostly with highest brightness settings. The Flex-Xc had neither blackout nor whiteout at all settings and distances.

CONCLUSION

Blackout or whiteout of images is an undesirable property that was found for several scopes, possibly impacting diagnostic and therapeutic purposes during ureteroscopy. These observations form a guide to impact a urologist's choice of instruments and settings.

Illumination matters Part III: Impact of light obstruction on illuminance from flexible ureteroscopes - a comparative PEARLS analysis

PURPOSE

Artifacts from poor ureteroscopes' light design with shadowing and dark areas in the field of view have been reported. The aim was to quantify effects of light obstruction in a kidney calyx model.

METHODS

We evaluated a series of contemporary flexible ureteroscopes including the Storz Flex-Xc and Flex-X2s, Olympus V3 and P7, Pusen 7.5F and 9.2F, as well as OTU Wiscope using an enclosed 3D-printed pink in vitro kidney calyx model submerged in saline, where the field of light was intentionally partially obstructed alternatively at 12, 3, 6, and 9 o'clock. A color spectrometer was used for illuminance measurements at a 45° opening position in the background of the model.

RESULTS

Overall and mean background illuminance for each obstructive situation were significantly different between scopes for both 50% and 100% brightness settings (ANOVA p < 0.001). At 50% brightness setting, almost all scopes had their highest and lowest background illuminance with the 6 o'clock and 3 o'clock obstructive situation, respectively. At 100% brightness setting, these became 6 o'clock and 12 o'clock obstructive situations. Considering each obstructive situation individually, the Flex-Xc was consistently the scope with highest background illuminance and the Pusen 7.5F the lowest. Background illuminance for each obstructive situation varied significantly for each scope individually, with the greatest range of variability for Pusen 7.5F and V3.

CONCLUSIONS

Illuminance performance of ureteroscopes within an obstructed calyx model differ significantly for various obstructive situations. Urologists should be aware of this to help guide their choice of ureteroscope.

The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP-tool): a Delphi consensus project on standardised evaluation of flexible ureterorenoscopes

OBJECTIVE

To develop a standardised tool to evaluate flexible ureterorenoscopes (fURS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A three-stage consensus building approach based on the modified Delphi technique was performed under guidance of a steering group. First, scope- and user-related parameters used to evaluate fURS were identified through a systematic scoping review. Then, the main categories and subcategories were defined, and the expert panel was selected. Finally, a two-step modified Delphi consensus project was conducted to firstly obtain consensus on the relevance and exact definition of each (sub)category necessary to evaluate fURS, and secondly on the evaluation method (setting, used tools and unit of outcome) of those (sub)categories. Consensus was reached at a predefined threshold of 80% high agreement.

RESULTS

The panel consisted of 30 experts in the field of endourology. The first step of the modified Delphi consensus project consisted of two questionnaires with a response rate of 97% (n = 29) for both. Consensus was reached for the relevance and definition of six main categories and 12 subcategories. The second step consisted of three questionnaires (response rate of 90%, 97% and 100%, respectively). Consensus was reached on the method of measurement for all (sub)categories.

CONCLUSION

This modified Delphi consensus project reached consensus on a standardised grading tool for the evaluation of fURS - The Uniform grading tooL for flexIble ureterorenoscoPes (TULIP) tool. This is a first step in creating uniformity in this field of research to facilitate future comparison of outcomes of the functionality and handling of fURS.

Thulium Fibre Laser versus Holmium:YAG for Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy: Outcomes from a Prospective Randomised Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser is the gold standard for ureterorenoscopic (URS) lithotripsy. Thulium fibre laser (TFL) has recently been introduced as a new technology and may challenge Ho:YAG as the preferred laser owing to favourable properties as demonstrated in preclinical studies.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare outcomes after URS lithotripsy with Ho:YAG and TFL.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In a prospective randomised trial, patients aged ≥18 yr with ureteral and/or renal stones (≥5 mm) scheduled to undergo day-case URS lithotripsy were invited to participate. In total, 120 consecutively admitted patients with signed consent were included for randomisation.

INTERVENTION

URS lithotripsy with Ho:YAG or TFL.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary outcome was the stone-free rate (SFR) assessed on noncontrast computed tomography at 3-mo follow-up. Secondary outcomes were the operative time and complications. Outcomes were compared between the groups using the t test and χ² test.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

After a single session, the SFR was 67% in the Ho:YAG group and 92% in the TFL group, p = 0.001. For ureteral stones, the SFR was 100% in both groups, and for renal stones; 49% (Ho:YAG) and 86% (TFL), p = 0.001. Operative time was shorter using TFL (49 min) compared to Ho:YAG (57 min), p = 0.008. Bleeding that impaired the endoscopic view was the most frequent intraoperative adverse event and occurred in 13 patients (22%) in the Ho:YAG group and three (5%) in the TFL group, p = 0.014.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, significantly more patients with renal stones achieved stone-free status and fewer experienced intraoperative complications using TFL compared to Ho:YAG. TFL is the emerging laser of choice for stone lithotripsy.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We compared outcomes after ureterorenoscopic treatment of kidney and ureteral stones using two different lasers. Our results show that the new thulium fibre laser technology is superior to the current standard laser (holmium:YAG) in clearing kidney stones and reducing operative complications.