These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23465156)
21. The digital flexible ureteroscope: in vitro assessment of optical characteristics. Zilberman DE; Lipkin ME; Ferrandino MN; Simmons WN; Mancini JG; Raymundo ME; Zhong P; Preminger GM J Endourol; 2011 Mar; 25(3):519-22. PubMed ID: 21361823 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Single use versus reusable digital flexible ureteroscopes: A prospective comparative study. Kam J; Yuminaga Y; Beattie K; Ling KY; Arianayagam M; Canagasingham B; Ferguson R; Varol C; Khadra M; Winter M; Ko R Int J Urol; 2019 Oct; 26(10):999-1005. PubMed ID: 31448473 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Improved durability of flex-Xc digital flexible ureteroscope: how long can you expect it to last? Multescu R; Geavlete B; Georgescu D; Geavlete P Urology; 2014 Jul; 84(1):32-5. PubMed ID: 24703462 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Performance and durability of leading flexible ureteroscopes. User HM; Hua V; Blunt LW; Wambi C; Gonzalez CM; Nadler RB J Endourol; 2004 Oct; 18(8):735-8. PubMed ID: 15659893 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing 2 Flexible Digital Ureteroscopes: ACMI/Olympus Invisio DUR-D and Olympus URF-V. Shah K; Monga M; Knudsen B Urology; 2015 Jun; 85(6):1267-71. PubMed ID: 25711157 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Intrarenal manipulation of flexible ureteroscopes: a comparative study. Monga M; Weiland D; Pedro RN; Lynch AC; Anderson K BJU Int; 2007 Jul; 100(1):157-9. PubMed ID: 17552963 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The Economic Implications of a Reusable Flexible Digital Ureteroscope: A Cost-Benefit Analysis. Martin CJ; McAdams SB; Abdul-Muhsin H; Lim VM; Nunez-Nateras R; Tyson MD; Humphreys MR J Urol; 2017 Mar; 197(3 Pt 1):730-735. PubMed ID: 27693449 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of New Single-Use Digital Flexible Ureteroscope Versus Nondisposable Fiber Optic and Digital Ureteroscope in a Cadaveric Model. Proietti S; Dragos L; Molina W; Doizi S; Giusti G; Traxer O J Endourol; 2016 Jun; 30(6):655-9. PubMed ID: 27084572 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. In vitro comparison of fragmentation efficiency of flexible pneumatic lithotripsy using 2 flexible ureteroscopes. Auge BK; Sekula JJ; Springhart WP; Zhu S; Zhong P; Preminger GM J Urol; 2004 Sep; 172(3):967-70. PubMed ID: 15311011 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. The new digital flexible ureteroscopes: 'size does matter'--increased ureteric access sheath use! Bach C; Nesar S; Kumar P; Goyal A; Kachrilas S; Papatsoris A; Masood J; Buchholz N Urol Int; 2012; 89(4):408-11. PubMed ID: 22964494 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Micro-Costing Analysis Demonstrates Comparable Costs for LithoVue Compared to Reusable Flexible Fiberoptic Ureteroscopes. Taguchi K; Usawachintachit M; Tzou DT; Sherer BA; Metzler I; Isaacson D; Stoller ML; Chi T J Endourol; 2018 Apr; 32(4):267-273. PubMed ID: 29239227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Prospective evaluation of flexible ureteroscopes with a novel evaluation tool. Bell JR; Penniston KL; Best SL; Nakada SY Can J Urol; 2017 Oct; 24(5):9004-9010. PubMed ID: 28971788 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Next-Generation Single-Use Ureteroscopes: An In Vitro Comparison. Tom WR; Wollin DA; Jiang R; Radvak D; Simmons WN; Preminger GM; Lipkin ME J Endourol; 2017 Dec; 31(12):1301-1306. PubMed ID: 28978227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Durability of working channel in flexible ureteroscopes when inserting ureteroscopic devices. Seto C; Ishiura Y; Egawa M; Komatsu K; Namiki M J Endourol; 2006 Mar; 20(3):223-6. PubMed ID: 16548735 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Ureteroscopes: flexible, rigid, and semirigid. Basillote JB; Lee DI; Eichel L; Clayman RV Urol Clin North Am; 2004 Feb; 31(1):21-32. PubMed ID: 15040398 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Clinical evaluation of efficacy of novel optically activated digital endoscope protection system against laser energy damage. Xavier K; Hruby GW; Kelly CR; Landman J; Gupta M Urology; 2009 Jan; 73(1):37-40. PubMed ID: 18848346 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparison of optics and performance of single channel and a novel dual-channel fiberoptic ureteroscope. Lusch A; Okhunov Z; del Junco M; Yoon R; Khanipour R; Menhadji A; Landman J Urology; 2015 Jan; 85(1):268-72. PubMed ID: 25530400 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Steep Infundibulopelvic Angle as a New Risk Factor for Flexible Ureteroscope Damage and Complicated Postoperative Course. Ozimek T; Cordes J; Wiessmeyer JR; Schneider MH; Hupe MC; Gilbert N; Merseburger AS; Kramer MW J Endourol; 2018 Jul; 32(7):597-602. PubMed ID: 29737199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Exaggerated primary endoscope deflection: initial clinical experience with prototype flexible ureteroscopes. Johnson GB; Grasso M BJU Int; 2004 Jan; 93(1):109-14. PubMed ID: 14678380 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Which Flexible Ureteroscopes (Digital vs. Fiber-Optic) Can Easily Reach the Difficult Lower Pole Calices and Have Better End-Tip Deflection: In Vitro Study on K-Box. A PETRA Evaluation. Dragos LB; Somani BK; Sener ET; Buttice S; Proietti S; Ploumidis A; Iacoboaie CT; Doizi S; Traxer O J Endourol; 2017 Jul; 31(7):630-637. PubMed ID: 28478744 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]