In Vitro Comparison of the Mechanical and Optical Characteristics of the Storz Flex-XC1 Single-use Ureteroscope and the Storz Flex-XC Reusable Flexible Ureteroscope

dc.contributor.authorLeelathanyakit C.
dc.contributor.authorChotikawanich E.
dc.contributor.authorTaweemonkongsap T.
dc.contributor.authorPhinthusophon K.
dc.contributor.authorJitpraphai S.
dc.contributor.authorRamart P.
dc.contributor.authorWoranisarakul V.
dc.contributor.authorMankongsrisuk T.
dc.contributor.authorHansomwong T.
dc.contributor.authorJongjitaree K.
dc.contributor.authorSrinualnad S.
dc.contributor.correspondenceLeelathanyakit C.
dc.contributor.otherMahidol University
dc.date.accessioned2025-06-12T18:05:57Z
dc.date.available2025-06-12T18:05:57Z
dc.date.issued2025-01-01
dc.description.abstractObjective: This study compared the mechanical and optical characteristics of the Storz Flex-X<sup>C1</sup> single-use ureteroscope and the Storz Flex-X<sup>C</sup> reusable flexible ureteroscope. The mechanical parameters comprised the upward/downward deflection, loop diameter, and irrigation flow rate. The optical parameters were image resolution and color representation. Materials and Methods: We conducted an in vitro evaluation of two Karl Storz flexible ureteroscopes. Specifically, we examined the Storz Flex-X<sup>C1</sup> single-use and Storz Flex-X<sup>C</sup> reusable scopes for upward/downward deflection angles, loop diameter, irrigation flow rates, image resolution, and color representation. The Storz Professional Image Enhancement System was also applied. Results: The Storz Flex-X<sup>C</sup> reusable ureteroscope achieved greater upward/downward deflection angles than did the Storz Flex-X<sup>C1</sup> single-use ureteroscope when a 200 µm laser or a 1.9 Fr tipless basket was used, with mean differences of 1.9°‒2.2° and 2.3°‒5.6°, respectively. No clinically significant difference in loop diameter was found. The Storz Flex reusable scope achieved a higher irrigation flow rate with an empty working channel (mean difference of 2.25 ml/min). Both scopes demonstrated identical image resolutions in air and in a normal saline solution, but the Storz Flex single-use device showed superior color representation. Conclusion: The Storz Flex-X<sup>C</sup> reusable flexible ureteroscope displayed slight advantages in terms of the deflection angle and irrigation flow rate. The Storz Flex-X<sup>C1</sup> single-use flexible ureteroscope offered improved color representation and marginally better resolution in saline.
dc.identifier.citationSiriraj Medical Journal Vol.77 No.5 (2025) , 313-321
dc.identifier.doi10.33192/smj.v77i5.272982
dc.identifier.eissn22288082
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105007363746
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/110623
dc.rights.holderSCOPUS
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.titleIn Vitro Comparison of the Mechanical and Optical Characteristics of the Storz Flex-XC1 Single-use Ureteroscope and the Storz Flex-XC Reusable Flexible Ureteroscope
dc.typeArticle
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=105007363746&origin=inward
oaire.citation.endPage321
oaire.citation.issue5
oaire.citation.startPage313
oaire.citation.titleSiriraj Medical Journal
oaire.citation.volume77
oairecerif.author.affiliationSiriraj Hospital

Files

Collections