227 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35607858)
1. The Carbon Footprint of Single-Use Flexible Cystoscopes Compared with Reusable Cystoscopes.
Hogan D; Rauf H; Kinnear N; Hennessey DB
J Endourol; 2022 Nov; 36(11):1460-1464. PubMed ID: 35607858
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Environmental impact of single-use and reusable flexible cystoscopes.
Kemble JP; Winoker JS; Patel SH; Su ZT; Matlaga BR; Potretzke AM; Koo K
BJU Int; 2023 May; 131(5):617-622. PubMed ID: 36515438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost and Environmental Impact of Disposable Flexible Cystoscopes Compared to Reusable Devices.
Boucheron T; Lechevallier E; Gondran-Tellier B; Michel F; Bastide C; Martin N; Baboudjian M
J Endourol; 2022 Oct; 36(10):1317-1321. PubMed ID: 35703325
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Environmental Impact of Flexible Cystoscopy: A Comparative Analysis Between Carbon Footprint of Isiris
Jahrreiss V; Sarrot P; Davis NF; Somani B
J Endourol; 2024 Apr; 38(4):386-394. PubMed ID: 38185843
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Time Efficiency and Performance of Single-Use
Chen R; Baas C; Farkouh A; Shete K; Peverini DR; Hartman JC; Amasyali AS; Belle J; Baldwin EA; Baldwin DD
J Endourol; 2024 Jan; 38(1):53-59. PubMed ID: 37800857
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Clinical Utility of a Single-Use Flexible Cystoscope Compared with a Standard Reusable Device: A Randomized Noninferiority Study.
Holmes A; O'Kane D; Wombwell A; Grills R
J Endourol; 2023 Jan; 37(1):80-84. PubMed ID: 36128833
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Life Cycle Assessment of Reusable and Disposable Cystoscopes: A Path to Greener Urological Procedures.
Baboudjian M; Pradere B; Martin N; Gondran-Tellier B; Angerri O; Boucheron T; Bastide C; Emiliani E; Misrai V; Breda A; Lechevallier E
Eur Urol Focus; 2023 Jul; 9(4):681-687. PubMed ID: 36543725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evolution of Single-Use Urologic Endoscopy: Benchtop and Initial Clinical Assessment of a New Single-Use Flexible Cystoscope.
Whelan P; Kim C; Tabib C; Preminger GM; Lipkin ME
J Endourol; 2022 Jan; 36(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 34235971
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Disposable versus Reusable Cystoscopes: A Micro-Costing Value Analysis in High-Volume and Low-Volume Urology Practices.
Young JA; Garden EB; Al-Alao O; Deoraj D; Small AC; Hruby G; Grotas AB; Palese MA
Urol Pract; 2021 Jul; 8(4):466-471. PubMed ID: 37145468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Workflow efficiencies for flexible cystoscopy: comparing single-use vs reusable cystoscopes.
Haislip I; Rindorf D; Cool C; Tester B
BMC Urol; 2024 Mar; 24(1):53. PubMed ID: 38448827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The grasper-integrated disposable flexible cystoscope is comparable to the reusable, flexible cystoscope for the detection of bladder cancer.
Seyam RM; Zeitouni OM; Alsibai TM; AlAyoub AJ; Al-Qassab OM; AlDeiry MA; Zino AO; Hulwi HS; Mokhtar AA; Shahbaz M; Junejo NN; Alotaibi MF; Alzahrani HM; Alothman KI; Alkhateeb SS; Al-Hussain TO; Altaweel WM
Sci Rep; 2020 Aug; 10(1):13495. PubMed ID: 32778771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A micro-costing analysis of outpatient flexible cystoscopy: implications for adoption of single-use flexible cystoscopes.
Su ZT; Huang MM; Matlaga BR; Hutfless S; Koo K
World J Urol; 2021 Nov; 39(11):4275-4281. PubMed ID: 34019137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Conversion to Disposable Cystoscopes Decreased Post-procedure Encounters and Infections Compared to Reusable Cystoscopes.
Geldmaker LE; Baird BA; Lyon TD; Regele EJ; Wajswol EJ; Pathak RA; Petrou SP; Haehn DA; Gajarawala NM; Ball CT; Broderick GA; Thiel DD
Urol Pract; 2023 Jul; 10(4):312-317. PubMed ID: 37228224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cost-Effectiveness of 90-day Single-use Flexible Cystoscope Trial: Single Center Micro-Costing Analysis and User Satisfaction.
Assmus MA; Krambeck AE; Lee MS; Agarwal DK; Mellon M; Rivera ME; Large T
Urology; 2022 Sep; 167():61-66. PubMed ID: 35772484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Carbon Footprint in Flexible Ureteroscopy: A Comparative Study on the Environmental Impact of Reusable and Single-Use Ureteroscopes.
Davis NF; McGrath S; Quinlan M; Jack G; Lawrentschuk N; Bolton DM
J Endourol; 2018 Mar; 32(3):214-217. PubMed ID: 29373918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of a Single-Use Flexible Cystoscope: A Multi-Institutional International Study.
Scotland K; Wong VKF; Chan JYH; Tawfiek E; Chiura A; Chew BH; Bagley D
J Endourol; 2020 Sep; 34(9):981-986. PubMed ID: 32578453
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Single-Use Grasper Integrated Flexible Cystoscope for Stent Removal: A Micro-Costing Analysis-Based Comparison.
Beebe SC; Jenkins LC; Posid T; Knudsen BE; Sourial MW
J Endourol; 2020 Aug; 34(8):816-820. PubMed ID: 32600072
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The Economics of Cystoscopy: A Microcost Analysis.
Kenigsberg AP; Gold S; Grant L; Lotan Y
Urology; 2021 Nov; 157():29-34. PubMed ID: 34010677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prospective comparison of flexible fiberoptic and digital cystoscopes.
Okhunov Z; Hruby GW; Mirabile G; Marruffo F; Lehman DS; Benson MC; Gupta M; Landman J
Urology; 2009 Aug; 74(2):427-30. PubMed ID: 19501889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Single-use digital flexible cystoscope for double J removal versus reusable instruments: a prospective, comparative study of functionality, risk of infection, and costs.
Oderda M; Asimakopoulos A; Batetta V; Bosio A; Dalmasso E; Morra I; Vercelli E; Gontero P
World J Urol; 2023 Nov; 41(11):3175-3180. PubMed ID: 37783843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
