Comparing the Efficacy of a Multimodular Flexible Ureteroscope With Its Conventional Counterpart in the Management of XXXX .

@entity1 @entity1290 @entity23446
OBJECTIVE: To report our prospective comparison of clinical efficacy between multimodular flexible ureteroscope, PolyScope, and conventional flexible ureteroscope, both combined with holmium laser lithotripsy in managing @entity1290  <3  cm in diameter. @entity1 AND METHODS: Between February 2011 and July 2014, a total of 360 adult @entity1 with @entity1290 were randomized in a single tertiary-care center trial. For 180 @entity1 in each arm, flexible ureteroscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy were done with either PolyScope or Olympus URF @entity23446 as control. The primary end points were single-session stone fragmentation rate and stone-free rate. The secondary end points comprised operation time, complication rate, and hospital stay. RESULTS: Demographic and preoperative parameters were comparable between 2 groups. For stones of different locations and sizes, single-session stone fragmentation rate of PolyScope was similar to that of URF @entity23446 . However, for lower calyceal stones, URF @entity23446 was significantly better than PolyScope (82.0% vs 69.2%; P  =  .022). No statistically significant difference existed in single-session or overall stone-free rate, complication rate, and hospital stay. Mean operation time of PolyScope group was 92.6      20.2  minutes, 9  minutes (10.8%) longer than that of URF @entity23446 group 83.3      17.1  minutes (P  <  .01). CONCLUSION: PolyScope demonstrates similar overall stone clearance rate to a conventional flexible ureteroscope in managing @entity1290  <3  cm in diameter, but for lower pole stones, it is of inferior efficacy and it is more skillfully demanding, taking longer operation time.
