PURPOSE: To evaluate forces exerted on a stone with different ureteroscopic irrigation systems that could impact stone migration during ureteroscopy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3-mm steel simulated stone was welded to a 3F stone basket. The basket wire was then backloaded into the working channel of a 4.5F Wolf semirigid ureteroscope. The basket shaft was attached to a 50 g load cell. The ureteroscope was placed in a ureteral model (14F silicon tubing). Simulated blood was dripped adjacent to the stone at 12 drops/min. Endo-irrigation devices were attached to the ureteroscope, and irrigation was applied at a rate sufficient to maintain visualization of the stone. Force on the stone was measured with the following endo-irrigation systems: Gravity (183 cm H2O); pressurized irrigation (150 mm Hg, 300 mm Hg); Kosin Technology Universal Piggyback Irrigation System (UPIS) at gravity (183 cm H2O), 150 mm Hg and 300 mm Hg; EMS Medical Peditrol Foot Pump; Cook Ureteroscopy Irrigation System; ACMI Irri-Flo Irrigation Delivery System; and Boston Scientific Single-Action-Pump System (SAPS). RESULTS: SAP required the least number of pumps (0.35/sec) to maintain a clear endoscopic field while the Peditrol device required the most (1.88/sec). Pulse duration was longest for the ACMI (1.6 sec) and shortest for pressurized gravity and UPIS (<0.3 sec). The average total maximum impulse during a pump was significantly greater with the Cook (0.017 Ns) and ACMI (0.027 Ns) systems. On average, gravity-based systems applied the least amount of force, < or =0.0006 Ns, maximum impulse at any given time. CONCLUSIONS: Gravity-based systems exert less force than hand-held and foot-pump devices. Of the hand-held devices, the SAP exerted the least average maximum impulse on the stone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hendlin et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: