Medical devices used for ureteroscopy for renal calculi

Expert Review of Medical Devices

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 73-80

  Weiland, Derek ^a   Canales, Benjamin K ^a   Monga, Manoj ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Calculus; Endoscopy; Flexible ureteropyeloscopy; Kidney stones; Minimally invasive treatment; Nephrolithiasis; Ureteroscopy

Indexed keywords

BIOMATERIAL; NITINOL; POLITEF; POLYETHYLENE; POLYMER; POLYURETHAN; SILICONE;

BALLOON DILATATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DIGITAL IMAGING; EXTRACORPOREAL LITHOTRIPSY; FILM COATING; GUIDE WIRE; HEALTH CARE COST; HOLMIUM LASER; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LASER LITHOTRIPSY; MATERIAL COATING; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; NEPHROLITHIASIS; PATIENT SELECTION; REVIEW; URETER STENT; URETEROSCOPE; URETEROSCOPY; UROLITHIASIS; VIDEORECORDING; ANIMAL;

ANIMALS; HUMANS; KIDNEY CALCULI; URETEROSCOPES; URETEROSCOPY;

EID: 33644835982     PISSN: 17434440     EISSN: 17452422     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/17434440.3.1.73     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Preminger GM. The metabolic evaluation of patients with recurrent nephrolithiasis: a review of comprehensive and simplified approaches. J. Urol. 141(3 Pt 2), 760-763 (1989).
2. Maloney ME, Springhart WP, Ekeruo WO, Young MD, Enemchukwu CU, Preminger CM. Ethnic background has minimal impact on the etiology of nephrolithiasis. J. Urol. 173(6), 2001-2004 (2005).
3. Walsh PC, Retik AB, Vaughan ED, Wein AJ. Urinary lithiasis: etiology, diagnosis, and medical management. In: Cambell's Urology (7th Edition). WB Saunders Company, PA, USA, 3, 2666-2667 (1998).
4. Chandhoke PS. When is medical prophylaxis cost-effective for recurrent calcium stones? J. Urol. 168(3), 937-940 (2002).
5. Wickham JE. Treatment of urinary tract stones. Br. Med. J. 307 (6916), 1414-1417 (1993).
6. Monga M, Venkatesh R, Best S et al. Durability of next generation ureteroscopes: randomized prospective study. J. Urol. 171, 389 (2004).
7. Abdelshehid C, Ahlering MT, Chou D et al. Comparison of flexible ureteroscopes: deflection, irrigant flow and optical characteristics. J. Urol. 173, 2017-2021 (2005).
8. Landman J, Lee DI, Lee C, Monga M. Evaluation of overall costs of currently available small flexible ureteroscopes. Urology 62(2), 218-222 (2003).
9. Springhart WP, Maloney ME, Sur RL et al. Digital video ureteroscope: a new paradigm in ureteroscopy. J. Urol. 173, 1581 (2005).
10. Clayman M, Uribe CA, Eichei L et al. Comparison of guide wires in urology. Which, when and why? J. Urol. 171, 2146-2150 (2004).
11. Kourambas J, Byrne RR, Preminger GM. Does a ureteral access sheath facilitate ureteroscopy? J. Urol. 165, 789-793 (2001).
12. Rehman J, Monga M, Landman J et al. Characterization of intrapelvic pressure during ureteropyeloscopy with ureteral access sheaths. Urology 61, 713-718 (2003).
13. Monga M, Best S, Venkatesh R et al. Prospective randomized comparison of 2 ureteral access sheaths during flexible retrograde ureteroscopy. J. Urol. 172. 572-573 (2004).
14. Beiko DT, Watterson JD. From bench top to ureteroscopy: a comparison of ureteral access sheath physical properties Presented at Annual Meeting of the Engineering and Urology Society. TX, USA, May 21 (2005).
15. Monga M, Gawlik A, Durfee W. A systematic evaluation of physical characteristics of ureteral access sheaths. Urology, 834-836 (2004).
16. Camargo A, Rubenstein JN, Ershoff BD et al. Decreased bacterial advancement using a novel everting access sheath. Presented at Annual Meeting of the Engineering and Urology Society. TX, USA, May 21 (2005).
17. Camargo A, Rubenstein JN, Ershoff B et al. An in vitro study of urothelial trauma with a novel everting ureteral access sheath. Presented at Annual Meeting of the Engineering and Urology Society. TX, USA, May 20 (2005).
18. Hendlin K, Lund B, Dockendorf K, Ramani R, Monga M. Radial dilation of ureteral balloons: a comparative in vitro analysis. J. Endourol. 19. 575-578 (2005).
19. Preminger GM, Lingeman JE, Goldfischer E et al. A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing levels of symptoms and discomfort associated with two investigational and two currently marketed ureteral stents. J. Urol. 173, 456 (2005).
20. Albala DM, Rickner T, Hoenig DM. Human results of ureteral stone extraction with the stone sweeper. J. Urol. 171, 444 (2004).
21. Beiko DT, Knudsen BE, Denstedt JD. Advances in ureteral stent design. J. Endourol. 17(4), 195-199 (2003).
22. Hendlin K, Dockendorf K, Horn C, Lund B, Monga M. Ureteral stents - coil strength and durometer. J Biomechanic. Eng. (2005) (in press).
23. Mittleman MW, Bucay-Cuto W, Li J et al. In vitro antimicrobial release profile of a new triclosan-eluting ureteral stent. J. Urol. 171, 443 (2004).
24. Watterson JD, Cadieux PA, Beiko DT et al. Oxalate-degrading enzymes from Oxalobacter formigenes. a novel device coating to reduce urinary tract biomaterial-related encrustation. J. Endourol. 17. 269-274 (2003).
25. Teichman JM, Vassar GJ, Bishoff JT et al. Holmium: YAG lithotripsy yields smaller fragments than lithoclast, pulsed dye laser, or electrohydraulic lithotripsy. J. Urol. 159, 17-23 (1998).
26. Maheshwari PN, Trivedi N, Kaushik S et al. Ureteroscopic management of upper ureteric calculi: holmium lithotripsy vs. pneumatic lithotripsy. J. Endourol. 17. M25-M14 (2003).
27. Knudsen BE, Glickman RD, Chew BH et al. Performance and safety of holmium: YAG laser optical fiber. J. Urol. 171, 442 (2003).
28. Kuo RL, Aaslan P, Zhong P et al. Impact of holmium laser settings and fiber diameter on stone fragmentation and endoscope deflection. J. Endourol. 12, 523-527 (1998).
29. Holley PG, Sharma S, Perry K et al. Assessment of novel ureteral occlusion device and comparison with stone cone in prevention of stone fragment migration during lithotripsy. J. Endourol. 19, 200-203 (2005).
30. Chenven E, Bagley DH. Retrieval and releasing capabilities of stone-basket designs in vitro. J. Endourol. 19, 204-209 (2005).
31. Canales BK, Ramani A, Monga M. Novel 1.5 F ureteroscopic stone basket facilitates entrapped stone laser lithotripsy and maximizes irrigant flow rates. J. Endourol. (2005) an press).
32. Hendlin K, Lee C, Anderson JK et al. Radial dilation force of tipless stone baskets. J. Endourol. 18, 946-947 (2003).
33. Lechavallier E, Luciani M, Nahon O et al. Transurethral ureterorenolithotripsy using new automated irrigation/suction system controlling pressure and flow compared with standard irrigation: a randomized pilot study. J. Endourol. 17, 97-101 (2003).
34. Blew B, Dagnone AJ, Pace KT, Honey RJ. Comparison of Peditrol® irrigation device and common methods of irrigation. J. Endourol. 19, 562-565 (2005).
35. Cybulski P, Honey RJD, Pace K. Fluid absorption during ureterorenoscopy. J. Endourol. 18, 739-742 (2004).
36. Knoll T, Trojan L, Haecker A, Alken P, Michel MS. Validation of computer-based training in ureterorenoscopy. BJU Int. 95, 1276-1279 (2005).
37. Ogan K, Jacomides L, Shulman MJ, Roehrborn CG, Cadeddu JA, Pearle MS. Virtual ureteroscopy predicts ureteroscopic proficiency of medical students on a cadaver. J. Urol. 172, 667-671 (2004).