Clinical trial compares suction efficiency in stone removal using novel ureteroscopes, indicating superior performance of DISS models.
Introduction : Novel Direct-In-Scope-Suction ureteroscopes (DISS-U) have recently been introduced to facilitate removal of small stone fragments. The purpose of this study was to compare two novel DISS-U to a conventional ureteroscope to determine efficiency for suctioning fluid and stone dust at different deflection angles. Methods Three disposable ureteroscopes were evaluated, including two DISS-U with 5.1-Fr and a 3.6-Fr channels, and were compared to a conventional ureteroscope with 3.6-Fr channel. For DISS-U trials, a conventional suction system was set at maximal settings and tested at deflection of 0, 90, and 140°, to simulate upper, interpolar, and lower pole kidney stone evacuation under 3 conditions (empty channel, 2.2-Fr basket, and 0.038 guidewire). For the conventional ureteroscope, suctioning was performed manually using a 60-mL Luer lock syringe. Five trials were performed to measure the time in seconds to remove 1 gram of CaOx density BegoStones (0.25, 0.5, and 1 mm) and 50-mL of saline. Results The 5.1-Fr DISS-U was the only scope that evacuated 0.5 mm stone fragments and evacuated them significantly faster from the upper and interpole compared to the lower pole (111.0 ± 27.7, 128.0 ± 29.1, and 377.7 ± 63.4 s at 0, 90, and 140°, respectively; p < 0.002). The 5.1-Fr DISS-U evacuated 1 g of dust faster than the 3.6 DISS-U and conventional ureteroscope at all angles ( p < 0.007). The 5.1-Fr DISS-U and the 3.6-Fr DISS-U required less suction time for 50 mL of saline compared to the conventional ureteroscope at all angles ( p < 0.001 for all). Using a 2.2-Fr basket increased suction time by 66.0% ( p < 0.001) for the 3.6-Fr DISS-U and by 44% ( p < 0.001) for the 5.1-Fr DISS-U, while the 0.038 guidewire increased suction time by 96% and 111%, respectively ( p < 0.001). No ureteroscope was able to suction 1 mm stone fragments without clogging. Conclusions The DISS ureteroscopes significantly outperformed the conventional ureteroscope in both suction speed and dust evacuation efficiency. The 5.1-Fr DISS-U demonstrated superior performance and is able to evacuate stone particles up to 0.5 mm.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Okhunov et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: