ArticleInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
Comparison of automated irrigation systems using an in vitro ureteroscopy model.
Article in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Paradigm shifts in fluid management using suction irrigation pressure autoregulating systems in modern flexible ureteroscopy with flexible and navigable suction access sheath: an evidence-based narrative from EAU Endourology.Current opinion in urology · 2026Review
- Benchtop comparison of seven ureteroscopes: evaluating physical properties and deflection with flexible and navigable suction access sheaths.BJU international · 2026Article
- Intrarenal pressure and flow rate profile using LithoVue™ elite: impact of different irrigation systems and working channel instruments.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Location of ureteral access sheath in the ureter. Does it affect the fluid flow in different calyces?Central European journal of urology · 2023Article
- Ergonomics and Surgeon Comfort During Flexible Ureteroscopy.Research and reports in urology · 2021Review
- Editorial Comment: Continuous monitoring of intrapelvic pressure during flexible ureteroscopy using a sensor wire: a pilot study.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- Under pressure: irrigation practice patterns during flexible ureteroscopy.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
- Editorial Comment: Comparison of automated irrigation systems using an in vitro ureteroscopy model.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- Pediatric Urology highlighted.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTwo automated irrigation systems have been released for use during endoscopic procedures such as ureteroscopy: the Cogentix RocaFlow® (CRF) and Thermedx FluidSmart® (TFS). Accurate pressure control using automated systems may help providers maintain irrigation pressures within a safe range while also providing clear visualization. Our objective was to directly compare these systems based on their pressure accuracy, pressure-flow relationships, and fluid heating capabilities in order to help providers better utilize the temperature and pressure settings of each system. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn in vitro ureteroscopy model was used for testing, consisting of a short semirigid ureteroscope (6/7, 5F, 31cm Wolf 425612) connected to a continuous digital pressure transducer (Meriam m1550). Each system pressure output and flow-rate, via 100mL beaker filling time, was measured using multiple trials at pressure settings between 30 and 300mmHg. Output fluid temperature was monitored using a digital thermometer (Omega DP25-TH).
resultsThe pressure output of both systems exceeded the desired setting across the entire tested range, a difference of 15.7±2.4mmHg for the TFS compared to 5.2±1.5mmHg for the CRF (p < 0.0001). Related to this finding, the TFS also had slightly higher flow rates across all trials (7±2mL/min). Temperature testing revealed a similar maximum temperature of 34.0⁰C with both systems, however, the TFS peaked after only 8 minutes and started to plateau as early as 4-5 minutes into the test, while the CRF took over 18 minutes to reach a similar peak.
conclusionsOur in vitro ureteroscopy testing found that the CRF system had better pressure accuracy than the TFS system but with noticeably slower fluid heating capabilities. Each system provided steady irrigation at safe pressures within their expected operating parameters with small differences in performance that should not limit their ability to provide steady irrigation at safe pressures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.