Scholarlink

<p>No differences were found in outcomes and complications when comparing single-use vs reusable flexible ureteroscopes. Costs per procedure of a&#xa0;reusable scope are dependent on purchase, repair, disinfection, and the number of procedures performed before repair/end of cycle. As for carbon footprint, one would expect that a&#xa0;reusable scope would be superior, but clear evidence is lacking. The same holds for life cycle assessments. For the current clinical practice, we would suggest for an average to large volume center to use single-use ureteroscopes in procedures where the risk of damage is increased, alongside reusable ureteroscopes.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Single-use versus reusable ureterorenoscoop: afwegingen voor keuze in de dagelijkse praktijk met het oog op uitkomsten, kosten en duurzaamheid

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月13日

查看全文
  • Xiaoye Zhu,
  • Emanuela Altobelli,
  • Guido M. Kamphuis

摘要

No differences were found in outcomes and complications when comparing single-use vs reusable flexible ureteroscopes. Costs per procedure of a reusable scope are dependent on purchase, repair, disinfection, and the number of procedures performed before repair/end of cycle. As for carbon footprint, one would expect that a reusable scope would be superior, but clear evidence is lacking. The same holds for life cycle assessments. For the current clinical practice, we would suggest for an average to large volume center to use single-use ureteroscopes in procedures where the risk of damage is increased, alongside reusable ureteroscopes.