Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Apr 12;15(3):211-215.
doi: 10.1016/j.aju.2017.03.003. eCollection 2017 Sep.

A naked-eye comparison of image quality between a portable versus a fixed camera system for digital flexible ureterorenoscopy - A single centre experience

Mohamed El Howairis  1 , Noor Buchholz  1   2   3
Affiliations

A naked-eye comparison of image quality between a portable versus a fixed camera system for digital flexible ureterorenoscopy - A single centre experience

Mohamed El Howairis et al. Arab J Urol. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess the image quality using the portable OTV-SI (Olympus, Southend, UK) light source system compared to a dedicated fixed standard stack system for flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS) as judged by the human eye.

Methods: We compared two differing flexible URS set-ups. The first was our normal completely digital fixed set-up, comprising a flexible ureteroscope and matching digital stack system (CLV-S40 PRO-6E, Olympus). The second set-up comprised the same digital ureteroscope but with a conventional non-digital stack system and the OTV-SI portable light source. Seven experienced urologists were asked to subjectively assess the quality of the video sequences with the naked eye. The image qualities assessed were as follows: colour, distortion, graininess, depth perception, contrast, and glare. Finally, they were asked to guess whether they were observing images from the normal fixed set-up or the portable set-up. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the two sets of nominal variables.

Results: There were no significant differences in the observation ratings between the fixed and portable systems, independent of observer or image settings. Also, the surgeons were not able to correctly guess which stack system had been used.

Conclusion: For flexible URS imaging, the combination of a digital ureteroscope with a conventional non-digital stack system together with the OTV-SI portable light source was subjectively found not to be inferior to the completely digital fixed set-up. Thus, the cheaper and smaller portable system could be considered as an economical option without substantial loss of image quality, especially useful in developing countries.

Keywords: ENT, ear, nose and throat; Endoscopy; Flexible ureterorenoscopy; Imaging quality; Light source; Portable; URS, ureterorenoscopy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The Olympus OTV-SI portable system.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The Olympus CLV-S40 PRO-6E stack system for digital flexible URS.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Buchholz N., El Howairis M.E., Bach C., Moraitis K., Masood J. From ‘stone cutting’ to high-technology methods: the changing face of stone surgery. Arab J Urol. 2011;9:25–27. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marshall V.F. Fiber optics in urology. J Urol. 1964;91:110–114. - PubMed
    1. Bagley D.H., Huffman J.L., Lyon E.S. Combined rigid and flexible ureteropyeloscopy. J Urol. 1983;130:243–244. - PubMed
    1. Tosoian J.J., Ludwig W., Sopko N., Mullins J.K., Matlaga B.R. The effect of repair costs on the profitability of a ureteroscopy program. J Endourol. 2015;29:406–409. - PubMed
    1. Zilberman D.E., Lipkin M.E., Ferrandino M.N., Simmons W.N., Mancini J.G., Raymundo M.E. The digital flexible ureteroscope: in vitro assessment of optical characteristics. J Endourol. 2011;25:519–522. - PubMed