Biomedical subjects

Sara Best

Publications and source records attributed to Sara Best.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

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.

Equipment Design↗

PubMed2005

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.

Age Factors↗

PubMed2005

Impact of heads-up display imaging on endoscopic task performance.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Heads-Up Imaging goggles provide ergonomic advantages to the endourologist. This study was designed to evaluate whether heads-up display impacts task performance for ureteroscopic stone retrieval. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ability to capture a 5-mm calculus with a Cook N-Circle 2.2F stone basket from an inanimate caliceal model was tested by three experienced and three novice stone-basket operators. Visual display for initial testing for each operator was randomized to the OptiVu HD3 Heads-Up googles or a 20- inch Sony Triniton monitor (TV). Subsequent testing alternated between the two devices. Camera input was provided by the Storz telecam SL-NTSC. The HD3 was set up to align the direction of view with the operator's hands, while the TV was aligned at an angle 45 degrees lateral and 30 degrees superior to the operator's direction of view to approximate the traditional room set-up for an endourologic procedure. Each operator performed five basketing trials with each display set-up. RESULTS: Expert operators retrieved calculi more rapidly (9.2 +/- 5.9 seconds) than novice operators (50.7 +/- 48.9 seconds), irrespective of whether a TV monitor or goggle display was utilized as the imaging modality. No significant differences were noted in task performance between the two imaging modalities for the expert (P = b0.60), novice (P = 0.77), or overall (P = 0.91) groups. CONCLUSION: The Optiview Heads-Up goggle display system does not offer advantages in task performance with specific regard to the ability to capture stone fragments with baskets.

Clinical Competence↗

PubMed2004

Minimally invasive therapy for renal cell carcinoma: is there a new community standard?

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate current practice use of laparoscopic and minimally invasive therapies in the treatment of renal cell cancer. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 174 members of the Minnesota Urological Society. The first case scenario described a 6-cm lesion not amenable to nephron-sparing surgery. The second case scenario described a 3-cm lower pole exophytic mass amenable to nephron-sparing surgery. The treatment options included traditional therapy (open partial or radical nephrectomy) and minimally invasive therapy (laparoscopic radical or partial nephrectomy or renal cryoablation). RESULTS: Our survey response rate was 49%. For the first scenario, 86% of respondents would offer open radical nephrectomy; however, 57% would offer laparoscopic surgery. Of those urologists offering laparoscopic surgery, 14% would refer outside their practice and 43% would use a hand-assisted approach. Sixty-four percent of the metropolitan and 56% of the urban respondents would offer a form of minimally invasive therapy; only 29% of rural respondents offered these options. For the second scenario, 90% of respondents would offer open partial nephrectomy and 45% a minimally invasive therapy; however, 24% of these would refer outside their practice. Thirty-eight percent of respondents would offer laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and 22% of respondents would offer renal cryoablation. Urologists completing residency after 1990 were more likely to offer a minimally invasive option (65%) compared with urologists completing residency before 1990 (31%). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive therapy for renal cell cancer is evolving into a community standard of care, with urologists relying heavily on outside referrals to access minimally invasive alternatives. Younger urologists living in metropolitan and urban areas are more likely to offer minimally invasive therapy. Additional emphasis should be placed on increasing the availability of minimally invasive techniques in rural settings.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Prospective randomized comparison of 2 ureteral access sheaths during flexible retrograde ureteroscopy.

PURPOSE: While the use of ureteral access sheaths facilitates flexible ureteroscopy, buckling or kinking of the device may preclude its successful application. We evaluate the ability of 2 hydrophilic coated ureteral access sheaths to obtain and maintain access to the upper collecting system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 54 flexible ureteroscopy procedures were randomized to use of the 12/15Fr Applied Access Forte XE (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, California) or the 12/14Fr Cook Flexor (Cook Urological, Spencer, Indiana) access sheaths. Device failure was defined as buckling of the sheath that prevented adequate placement, kinking of the sheath after removal of the obturator or difficulty in passing instruments through the sheath. The ease of placement, instrument passage and stone extraction was scored from poor (1) to excellent (4). Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney tests were used for statistical comparisons. RESULTS: No patient required ureteral balloon dilation. There was no significant difference between the groups in regard to preoperative stenting (34% and 31%, p = 1.00) or rigid ureteroscopy before sheath placement (32% and 25%, p = 0.751). The device failure rate was 44% for the Applied sheath and 0% for the Cook sheath (p <0.001). Failures with the Applied sheath included buckling (25%), kinking (25%) and difficulty passing instruments (13%). The Cook sheath was rated superior with regard to ease of placement (3.89 vs 3.00, p = 0.001), ease of instrument passage (3.97 vs 3.29, p = 0.001) and ease of stone extraction (3.74 vs 3.00, p = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the Cook Flexor sheath was superior with regard to overall failure and ease of use.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Contemporary management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: practice patterns in Minnesota.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction can be addressed surgically by an open, laparoscopic, endoscopic, or fluoroscopic procedure. Our objective was to establish what surgical alternatives are currently offered by urologists in Minnesota. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 174 members of the Minnesota Urological Society. Practice settings were characterized as rural, urban, or metropolitan on the basis of the ZIP-code classifications of the Minnesota Ambulance Association and state geographic legislation. Respondents were asked to select initial treatment options for an adult patient with flank pain, decreased renal function, and hydronephrosis secondary to UPJ obstruction. RESULTS: Whereas 60% of the respondents would offer open pyeloplasty, only 12% would offer it as the only treatment option. The two most common minimally invasive therapies offered were the Acucise balloon (48%) and percutaneous antegrade endopyelotomy (48%). Rural urologists were more likely to offer Acucise balloon incision (71%) than were urban (28%; P=0.045) or metropolitan (55%; P=0.412) urologists. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of urologists still offer open pyeloplasty as first-line therapy for UPJ obstruction. Further emphasis should be placed on increasing the availability of endoscopic and laparoscopic procedures.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Nephrolithiasis: "scope," shock or scalpel?

PURPOSE: To evaluate treatment preferences for complex urinary calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 174 members of the Minnesota Urological Society. Three case scenarios were presented: a 1.5-cm lower-pole calculus with unfavorable anatomy, a 1.4-cm proximalureteral calculus, and a staghorn calculus. The treatment options offered were extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), ureteral stenting, ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and open surgery. RESULTS: Our survey response rate was 49%. A PCNL for staghorn calculi was more likely to be offered by urologists in metropolitan (100%; P<0.001) and urban (100%; P=0.003) settings than rural settings (57%). Whereas only 22% of urban and metropolitan urologists would offer anatrophic nephrolithotomy, 43% of rural urologists would include this among their treatment options. A PCNL was more likely to be offered by urologists trained after 1980 (100%) than by urologists trained before 1980 (81%; P=0.004). For a large lower-pole calculus with unfavorable anatomy, urologists with >50% managed-care practices were more likely (91%) than urologists with <50% managed-care practices (65%) to select PCNL for such stones (P=0.034). Whereas 82% of metropolitan urologists would select PCNL, 43% of rural urologists would consider SWL as initial therapy. A URS was more likely to be offered by urologists trained after 1980 (16%) than by urologists trained before 1980 (0; P=0.044). For a large proximal-ureteral calculus, metropolitan urologists were most likely (64%) to use stents initially (urban 28%; P=0.014; rural 14%; P=0.017). Rural urologists were more likely to offer SWL (100%) than were metro urologists (55%; P=0.024). CONCLUSIONS: Initial therapy for nephrolithiasis differs significantly according to geographic location, year of residency completion, and the percentage of managed-care patients in a urologist's practice. Future emphasis should be placed on increasing the availability of endoscopic techniques in rural settings.

Decision Making↗