Initial experience of comparison between two slimmest single-use flexible ureteroscopes: Indoscope Sleek (Bioradmedisys™) Versus Uscope PU3033A (Pusen™): A single-center prospective study.

PURPOSE

A single-use digital flexible ureteroscope (fURS) has become a cost-effective alternative option to reusable fURS. The requirement of large-diameter access sheath for passage of 9.5 Fr single-use fURS has not always achieved in the first attempt in all cases leading to stage stone clearance. Recently, two slimmest single-use digital disposable fURSs have been introduced by Bioradmedisys™ and Pusen™ to mitigate the accessibility problem, without or with small size access sheath. Primary objective was to compare in vivo performance and surgical outcomes with two single-use fURS: 7.5Fr Indoscope (Bioradmedisys™, Pune, India) and 7.5Fr Uscope PU3033A (Pusen, Zhuhai, China).

METHODS

60 patients undergoing Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) with < 2 cm renal stones were prospectively randomized into: Group A (30 patients) for Indoscope and Group B (30 patients) for Uscope PU3033A. Pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative parameters were evaluated. In vivo visibility and maneuverability were rated on 5-point Likert scale by the operating surgeon. At one-month stone clearance was assessed with ultrasound and X-ray KUB. Data were analyzed using SPSS 23.0.

RESULTS

Patient demographics and stone characteristics were comparable in both groups. Indoscope had significantly higher visibility (p < 0.05) than Uscope; however, the maneuverability scores were comparable between both the groups (p > 0.05). 28 patients in group A and 26 patients in group B achieved complete stone clearance (p = 0.38). Scope failure was observed in 1 case of group B (p = 0.31).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that 7.5Fr Indoscope has better vision than 7.5Fr Uscope and the rest of in vivo performances were comparable with similar outcomes and complications among both scopes.