Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding the Instruments: Endoscope

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Practical Management of Urinary Stone

  • 590 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is principally to provide the equipment information, knowledge, and tips while using the ureteroscope (URS); it may familiarize urologists with using the URS in their clinical practice. We begin with the brief history of URS, followed by the URS mechanical futures such as the differences with “rigid vs. flexible” and “fiber-optic scope vs. digital scope” in optics. “Durability and single-use ureteroscope” and “tips to prevent flexible ureteroscope damages” are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Sanguedolce F, Bozzini G, Chew B, Kallidonis P, De La Rosette J. The evolving role of retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of urolithiasis. Eur Urol Focus. 2017;3(1):1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Isotani S, Noma Y, Wakumoto Y, Muto S, Horie S. Endurological treatment trend of upper urinary urolithiasis in Japan from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination Database. Int J Urol. 2019;25:373.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ordon M, Urbach D, Mamdani M, Saskin R, Honey RJD, Pace KT. The surgical management of kidney stone disease: a population based time series analysis. J Urol. 2014;192(5):1450–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Geraghty RM, Jones P, Somani BK. Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol. 2017;31(6):547–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pietropaolo A, Proietti S, Geraghty R, Skolarikos A, Papatsoris A, Liatsikos E, et al. Trends of “urolithiasis: interventions, simulation, and laser technology” over the last 16 years (2000–2015) as published in the literature (PubMed): a systematic review from European section of Uro-technology (ESUT). World J Urol. 2017;35(11):1651–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Li JK, Teoh JY, Ng C-F. Updates in endourological management of urolithiasis. Int J Urol. 2019;26(2):172–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rukin NJ, Siddiqui ZA, Chedgy ECP, Somani BK. Trends in upper tract stone disease in England: evidence from the hospital episodes statistics database. Urol Int. 2017;98(4):391–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Proietti S, Knoll T, Giusti G. Contemporary ureteroscopic management of renal stones. Int J Surg. 2016;36(Pt D):681–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Giusti G, Proietti S, Villa L, Cloutier J, Rosso M, Gadda GM, et al. Current standard technique for modern flexible ureteroscopy: tips and tricks. Eur Urol. 2016;70(1):188–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Alenezi H, Denstedt JD. Flexible ureteroscopy: technological advancements, current indications and outcomes in the treatment of urolithiasis. Asian J Urol. 2015;2(3):133–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kumar A, Kumar N, Vasudeva P, Jha SK, Kumar R, Singh H. A prospective, randomized comparison of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery and Miniperc for treatment of 1 to 2 cm radiolucent lower calyceal renal calculi: a single Center experience. J Urol. 2015;193(1):160–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zumstein V, Betschart P, Abt D, Schmid H-P, Panje CM, Putora PM. Surgical management of urolithiasis—a systematic analysis of available guidelines. BMC Urol. 2018;18(1):1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Drake T, Grivas N, Dabestani S, Knoll T, Lam T, MacLennan S, et al. What are the benefits and harms of ureteroscopy compared with shock-wave lithotripsy in the treatment of upper ureteral stones? A systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017;72(5):1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL, Monga M, Murad MH, Nelson CP, et al. Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society guideline, part II. J Urol. 2016;196(4):1161–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ordon M, Andonian S, Blew B, Schuler T, Chew B, Pace KT. CUA Guideline: Management of ureteral calculi. Can Urol Assoc J. 2015;9(11−12):E837–51.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Donaldson JF, Lardas M, Scrimgeour D, Stewart F, MacLennan S, Lam TBL, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lower-pole renal stones. Eur Urol. 2015;67(4):612–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Castro EP, Osther PJS, Jinga V, Razvi H, Stravodimos KG, Parikh K, et al. Differences in ureteroscopic stone treatment and outcomes for distal, mid-, proximal, or multiple ureteral locations: the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society ureteroscopy global study. Eur Urol. 2014;66(1):102–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Marshall VF. Fiber optics in urology. J Urol. 1964;91(1):110–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Dore B, Orget J, Grange P, Aubert J. [Flexible ureteroscopy. Diagnostic and therapeutic significance. Apropos of 15 cases]. Annales d'urologie. Ann Urol (Paris); 1989;23(5):377–382.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zilberman DE, Lipkin ME, Ferrandino MN, Simmons WN, Mancini JG, Raymundo ME, et al. The digital flexible ureteroscope: in vitro assessment of optical characteristics. J Endourol. 2011;25(3):519–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dragos LB, Somani BK, Sener ET, Buttice S, Proietti S, Ploumidis A, et al. Which flexible ureteroscopes (digital vs. fiber-optic) can easily reach the difficult lower pole calices and have better end-tip deflection: in vitro study on K-Box. A PETRA evaluation. J Endourol. 2017;31(7):630–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Giusti G, Proietti S, Rodríguez-Socarrás ME, Saitta G, Bellinzoni P, Gaboardi F. Semirigid ureteroscopy: step by step. J Endourol. 2020 May;34(S1):S13–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mursi K, Elsheemy MS, Morsi HA, Ghaleb A-KA, Abdel-Razzak OM. Semi-rigid ureteroscopy for ureteric and renal pelvic calculi: Predictive factors for complications and success. Arab J Urol. 2013;11(2):136–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rana AM, Aquil S, Khawaja AM. Semirigid ureteroscopy and pneumatic lithotripsy as definitive management of obstructive ureteral calculi during pregnancy. Urology. 2009;73(5):964–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wright AE, Rukin NJ, Somani BK. Ureteroscopy and stones: current status and future expectations. World J Nephrol. 2014;3(4):243–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Knudsen B, Miyaoka R, Shah K, Holden T, Turk TMT, Pedro RN, et al. Durability of the next-generation flexible fiberoptic ureteroscopes: a randomized prospective multi-institutional clinical trial. Urology. 2010;75(3):534–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Afane JS, Olweny EO, Bercowsky E, Sundaram CP, Dunn MD, Shalhav AL, et al. Flexible ureteroscopes: a single center evaluation of the durability and function of the new endoscopes smaller than 9Fr. J Urol. 2000;164(4):1164–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Monga M, Best S, Venkatesh R, Ames C, Lee C, Kuskowski M, et al. Durability of flexible ureteroscopes: a randomized, prospective study. J Urol. 2006;176(1):137–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Pietrow PK, Auge BK, Delvecchio FC, Silverstein AD, Weizer AZ, ALBALA DM, et al. Techniques to maximize flexible ureteroscope longevity. Urology. 2002;60(5):784–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Traxer O, Dubosq F, Jamali K, Gattegno B, Thibault P. New-generation flexible ureterorenoscopes are more durable than previous ones. Urology. 2006;68(2):276–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Gridley CM, Knudsen BE. Digital ureteroscopes: technology update. Res Rep Urol. 2017;9:19–25.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Somani BK, Al-Qahtani SM, de Medina SDG, Traxer O. Outcomes of flexible ureterorenoscopy and laser fragmentation for renal stones: comparison between digital and conventional ureteroscope. Urology. 2013;82(5):1017–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Temiz MZ, Colakerol A, Ertas K, Tuken M, Yuruk E. Fiberoptic versus digital: a comparison of durability and cost effectiveness of the two flexible ureteroscopes. Urol Int. 2019;102(2):181–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Legemate JD, Kamphuis GM, Freund JE, Baard J, Zanetti SP, Catellani M, et al. Durability of flexible ureteroscopes: a prospective evaluation of longevity, the factors that affect it, and damage mechanisms. Eur Urol Focus. 2018 Mar 10:1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lin C-C, Wu LS-H, Huang S-S, Lin C-F, Chen W-H, Wu C-T. Surgical technique to achieve high durability of flexible ureteroscopes: a single hospital experience. Biomed J. 2018;41(6):385–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Proietti S, Dragos L, Molina W, Doizi S, Giusti G, Traxer O. Comparison of new single-use digital flexible ureteroscope versus nondisposable Fiber optic and digital ureteroscope in a cadaveric model. J Endourol. 2016;30(6):655–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Scotland KB, Chan JYH, Chew BH. Single-use flexible ureteroscopes: how do they compare with reusable ureteroscopes? J Endourol. 2019;33(2):71–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Taguchi K, Usawachintachit M, Tzou DT, Sherer BA, Metzler I, Isaacson D, et al. Micro-costing analysis demonstrates comparable costs for LithoVue compared to reusable flexible fiberoptic ureteroscopes. J Endourol. 2018;32(4):267–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cho SY, Lee JY, Shin DG, Seo IY, Yoo S, Park HK. Evaluation of performance parameters of the disposable flexible ureterorenoscope (LITHOVUE) in patients with renal stones: a prospective, observational, single-arm, multicenter study. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):9795–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Martin CJ, McAdams SB, Abdul-Muhsin H, Lim VM, Nunez-Nateras R, Tyson MD, et al. The economic implications of a reusable flexible digital ureteroscope: a cost-benefit analysis. J Urol. 2017;197(Pt 1):730–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Davis NF, McGrath S, Quinlan M, Jack G, Lawrentschuk N, Bolton DM. Carbon footprint in flexible ureteroscopy: a comparative study on the environmental impact of reusable and single-use ureteroscopes. J Endourol. 2018;32(3):214–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Defidio L, De Dominicis M, Di Gianfrancesco L, Fuchs G, Patel A. Improving flexible ureterorenoscope durability up to 100 procedures. J Endourol. 2012 Oct;26(10):1329–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan

    Shuji Isotani

Authors
  1. Shuji Isotani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuji Isotani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Anthony C. F. Ng

  2. International Urology, Fertility and Gynecology Centre, Mount Elizabeth Hospital, Singapore, Singapore

    Michael Y.C. Wong

  3. Department of Urology, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan

    Shuji Isotani

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Isotani, S. (2021). Understanding the Instruments: Endoscope. In: Ng, A.C.F., Wong, M.Y., Isotani, S. (eds) Practical Management of Urinary Stone. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4193-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-4193-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-16-4192-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-16-4193-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation