Jason Skenazy

Durability of Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Randomized, Prospective Study

PURPOSE We performed a randomized, prospective, multi-institutional study evaluating the durability of commercially available flexible ureteroscopes. MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 192 patients were randomized to the use of 7 less than 9Fr flexible ureteroscopes, including the Storz 11274AA and Flex-X, the ACMI DUR-8 and DUR-8 Elite, Wolf models 7330.170 and 7325.172, and the Olympus URF-P3. Information about total and lower pole use time, the number and method of ureteroscope insertion, and they type and duration of accessory instrumentation was recorded. Surgeons were asked to rate the visibility and maneuverability of the instrument on a scale of 0-poor to 10-excellent. RESULTS The indication for ureteroscopy was upper tract calculi in 87% of cases. Of ureteroscope insertions 97% were performed through an access sheath. The average of number of cases before repair ranged from 3.25 for the Wolf 7325 to 14.4 for the ACMI DUR-8 Elite. Average ureteroscope operative time was statistically longer for the DUR-8 Elite (494 minutes) than for the Flex-X (p = 0.047), and the Wolf 7325 and 7330 (p = 0.001 and 0.001, respectively). Duration of use before repair for the URF-P3 (373 minutes) was statistically longer than for the Wolf 7325 and 7330 (p = 0.016 and 0.017, respectively). Minutes of use with an instrument in the working channel were significantly more with the DUR-8 Elite and the URF-P3 than the Wolf 7330 (p = 0.017 and 0.008) and 7325 (p = 0.012 and 0.005, respectively). The ureteroscope that experienced the greatest average duration of lower pole use was the URF-P3, while the shortest was the Wolf 7325 (103 vs 20 minutes, p = 0.005). Average minutes of laser use before breakage was significantly longer for the DUR-8 Elite than for the Wolf 7325 (110 vs 21 minutes, p = 0.021) and 7330 (24 minutes, p = 0.025). CONCLUSIONS Currently available less than 9Fr flexible ureteroscopes remain fragile instruments. The DUR-8 Elite and Olympus URF-P3 proved to be the most durable devices.

Minimally Invasive Therapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Practice Patterns in Minnesota

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) affects more than 50% of men by the age of 60 and 90% by age 85. Many of these men are not candidates for surgical procedures such as transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), stimulating the development of less-invasive forms of therapy. We studied the utilization of these newer therapies by urologists practicing in Minnesota. MATERIALS AND METHODS An anonymous questionnaire was sent to 174 members of the Minnesota Urological Society, of which 58 were available for analysis. A case scenario was presented of a patient with BPH refractory to medical therapy. The options were traditional and minimally invasive therapies. The physician was asked to select whether he or she would offer each option and perform the procedure or refer the patient within or outside the practice. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square and two-sample t-tests on Minitab software. The results were considered significant at P < 0.05. RESULTS While 59% of the respondents would offer both minimally invasive and traditional alternatives, 10% would offer only minimally invasive therapy, while 29% would offer only traditional therapy (P = 0.01). The most common minimally invasive therapies offered were transurethral microwave thermotherapy and (55%) and transurethral needle ablation (33%). If they offered a form of minimally invasive therapy, the majority of respondents would perform the procedure themselves. Rural urologists were less likely to offer minimally invasive therapy (43%) than metro physicians (81%; P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in the use of minimally invasive therapies by rural and urban urologists (P = 0.409) or urban and metropolitan urologists (P = 0.119). Urologists completing their training between 1960 and 1980 were less likely to offer minimally invasive therapy. There was no significant difference in the likelihood of offering traditional versus minimally invasive alternatives according to the percent of managed care in the practice. CONCLUSIONS Urologists closer to the completion of their residency training are more likely to include a minimally invasive technique in their treatment plan, while urologists practicing in rural Minnesota are less likely to offer minimally invasive procedures. Further emphasis should be placed on increasing the availability of minimally invasive techniques in rural settings.