Lama Daniel J, Owyong Michael, Parkhomenko Egor, Patel Roshan M, Landman Jaime, Clayman Ralph V
Department of Urology, School of Medicine, University of California , Irvine, Orange, California.
J Endourol. 2018 May;32(5):431-436. doi: 10.1089/end.2017.0811. Epub 2018 Feb 13.
To evaluate the flow characteristics produced by a manual and automated-pump irrigation system connected to a flexible ureteroscope.
An in vitro analysis of a manual hand-pump infuser (HP) and the UROMAT Endoscopic Automatic System for Irrigation (E.A.S.I.) pump was performed. Standard irrigation tubing was used to connect a three-way valve to a flexible ureteroscope, the irrigation system, and a digital manometer. Flow rate and irrigation pressure measurements were recorded over a 15-minute period using pressure settings of 150 and 200 mm Hg for both irrigation pump systems. Once the HP was inflated to the initial pressure, it was not reinflated over the course of the trial. Data were collected with the working channel unoccupied and with placement of a 200 μm (0.6F) holmium laser fiber, 1.7F nitinol stone retrieval basket, or 2.67F guidewire.
The difference in pressure measured at the site of inflow of irrigation to the ureteroscope was significantly greater using the HP compared to the E.A.S.I. pump at pressure settings of 150 mm Hg with and without the use of ureteroscopic instrumentation (p < 0.001), and at 200 mm Hg with instrumentation in the working channel (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the flow rate of irrigation through the open-channel ureteroscope over the course of 5 minutes between the two pump systems.
The flow rates of irrigation produced by the HP and the E.A.S.I. pump are similar at pressures of 150 and 200 mm Hg irrespective of the occupancy of a ureteroscope's working channel during the first 5-minutes of irrigation. Irrigation pressure at the entry site of the ureteroscope is subject to significant variability with use of the HP compared to the E.A.S.I. pump irrigation system.
评估连接至软性输尿管镜的手动和自动泵灌注系统所产生的血流特性。
对手动手泵灌注器（HP）和UROMAT内镜自动灌注系统（E.A.S.I.）泵进行体外分析。使用标准灌注管将三通阀连接至软性输尿管镜、灌注系统和数字压力计。在15分钟内，使用两种灌注泵系统150和200 mmHg的压力设置记录流速和灌注压力测量值。一旦HP充气至初始压力，在试验过程中不再重新充气。在工作通道未占用以及放置200μm（0.6F）钬激光光纤、1.7F镍钛诺结石取出篮或2.67F导丝的情况下收集数据。
在150 mmHg压力设置下，无论是否使用输尿管镜器械，使用HP时在输尿管镜灌注流入部位测得的压力差异显著大于E.A.S.I.泵（p < 0.001）；在200 mmHg压力设置下，工作通道中有器械时差异显著（p < 0.01）。在5分钟内，两种泵系统通过开放通道输尿管镜的灌注流速无显著差异。
在150和200 mmHg压力下，HP和E.A.S.I.泵产生的灌注流速相似，且在灌注的前5分钟内与输尿管镜工作通道是否占用无关。与E.A.S.I.泵灌注系统相比，使用HP时输尿管镜入口处的灌注压力存在显著差异。
