单丝输尿管护套,既安全又经济

IF 1.8 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Advances in Urology Pub Date : 2016-11-15 DOI:10.1155/2016/6267953
J. Delto, G. Wayne, Ajaydeep S Sidhu, Rafael Yanes, A. Bhandari, A. Nieder
{"title":"单丝输尿管护套,既安全又经济","authors":"J. Delto, G. Wayne, Ajaydeep S Sidhu, Rafael Yanes, A. Bhandari, A. Nieder","doi":"10.1155/2016/6267953","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Novel disposable products for ureteroscopy are often inherently more expensive than conventional ones. For example, the Cook Flexor© Parallel™ (Flexor) access sheath is designed for ease and efficiency of gaining upper tract access with a solitary wire. We analyze the cost combinations, efficiency, and safety of disposable products utilized for upper tract access, including the Flexor and standard ureteral access sheath. Methods. We performed a retrospective review from January 2014 to October 2014 of patients undergoing URS for nephrolithiasis, who were prestented for various reasons (e.g., infection). Common combinations most utilized at our institution include “Classic,” “Flexor,” and “Standard.” Total costs per technique were calculated. Patient characteristics, operative parameters, and outcomes were compared among the groups. Results. The most commonly used technique involved a standard ureteral sheath and was the most expensive ($294). The second most utilized and least expensive combination involved the Flexor, saving up to $80 per case (27%). All access sheaths were placed successfully and without complications. There were no significant differences in operative time, blood loss, or complications. Conclusions. In prestented patients within this study, the Flexor combination was the most economical. Although the savings appear modest, long-term impact on costs can be substantial.","PeriodicalId":7490,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Urology","volume":"2016 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/6267953","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Single Wire Ureteral Access Sheath, Both Safe and Economical\",\"authors\":\"J. Delto, G. Wayne, Ajaydeep S Sidhu, Rafael Yanes, A. Bhandari, A. Nieder\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2016/6267953\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction. Novel disposable products for ureteroscopy are often inherently more expensive than conventional ones. For example, the Cook Flexor© Parallel™ (Flexor) access sheath is designed for ease and efficiency of gaining upper tract access with a solitary wire. We analyze the cost combinations, efficiency, and safety of disposable products utilized for upper tract access, including the Flexor and standard ureteral access sheath. Methods. We performed a retrospective review from January 2014 to October 2014 of patients undergoing URS for nephrolithiasis, who were prestented for various reasons (e.g., infection). Common combinations most utilized at our institution include “Classic,” “Flexor,” and “Standard.” Total costs per technique were calculated. Patient characteristics, operative parameters, and outcomes were compared among the groups. Results. The most commonly used technique involved a standard ureteral sheath and was the most expensive ($294). The second most utilized and least expensive combination involved the Flexor, saving up to $80 per case (27%). All access sheaths were placed successfully and without complications. There were no significant differences in operative time, blood loss, or complications. Conclusions. In prestented patients within this study, the Flexor combination was the most economical. Although the savings appear modest, long-term impact on costs can be substantial.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Urology\",\"volume\":\"2016 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/6267953\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6267953\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6267953","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

介绍。输尿管镜的新型一次性产品通常比传统产品更昂贵。例如,Cook Flexor©Parallel™(Flexor)访问护套的设计是为了方便和高效地通过单独的导线获得上尿路访问。我们分析了用于上尿路通路的一次性产品的成本组合、效率和安全性,包括Flexor和标准输尿管通路鞘。方法。我们对2014年1月至2014年10月因各种原因(如感染)接受尿路治疗的肾结石患者进行了回顾性研究。我们机构最常用的组合包括“经典”、“Flexor”和“标准”。计算了每种技术的总成本。比较两组患者的特征、手术参数和结果。结果。最常用的技术包括一个标准输尿管鞘,也是最昂贵的(294美元)。第二个最常用和最便宜的组合是Flexor,每个病例节省80美元(27%)。所有导管套均成功放置,无并发症。两组在手术时间、出血量和并发症方面无显著差异。结论。在本研究的患者中,屈肌联合是最经济的。虽然节省的金额不大,但对成本的长期影响可能是巨大的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Single Wire Ureteral Access Sheath, Both Safe and Economical
Introduction. Novel disposable products for ureteroscopy are often inherently more expensive than conventional ones. For example, the Cook Flexor© Parallel™ (Flexor) access sheath is designed for ease and efficiency of gaining upper tract access with a solitary wire. We analyze the cost combinations, efficiency, and safety of disposable products utilized for upper tract access, including the Flexor and standard ureteral access sheath. Methods. We performed a retrospective review from January 2014 to October 2014 of patients undergoing URS for nephrolithiasis, who were prestented for various reasons (e.g., infection). Common combinations most utilized at our institution include “Classic,” “Flexor,” and “Standard.” Total costs per technique were calculated. Patient characteristics, operative parameters, and outcomes were compared among the groups. Results. The most commonly used technique involved a standard ureteral sheath and was the most expensive ($294). The second most utilized and least expensive combination involved the Flexor, saving up to $80 per case (27%). All access sheaths were placed successfully and without complications. There were no significant differences in operative time, blood loss, or complications. Conclusions. In prestented patients within this study, the Flexor combination was the most economical. Although the savings appear modest, long-term impact on costs can be substantial.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Urology
Advances in Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Urology is a peer-reviewed, open access journal that publishes state-of-the-art reviews and original research papers of wide interest in all fields of urology. The journal strives to provide publication of important manuscripts to the widest possible audience worldwide, without the constraints of expensive, hard-to-access, traditional bound journals. Advances in Urology is designed to improve publication access of both well-established urologic scientists and less well-established writers, by allowing interested scientists worldwide to participate fully.
期刊最新文献
A Review of Electronic Early Warning Systems for Acute Kidney Injury. Patient Demographics and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events after Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Prostate Cancer. Complications and Influential Perioperative Factors Associated with SpaceOAR Hydrogel Placement. Photodynamic Therapeutic Effect during 5-Aminolevulinic Acid-Mediated Photodynamic Diagnosis-Assisted Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumors. Effects of the Surgical Ligation of the Ureter in Different Locations on the Kidney over Time in the Rat Model.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1