To conduct a cost-benefit analysis comparing reusable and single-use ureteroscopes in the context of endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS), highlighting the significance of cost in clinical decision-making.
Key Findings:
No significant differences in stone-free rates or complications between reusable and single-use ureteroscopes (p > 0.05).
Single-use ureteroscopes showed higher preoperative positive urine culture (p < 0.05) and longer surgical duration (mean difference: X minutes).
Each reusable scope required at least one repair due to breakage, impacting overall cost.
Interpretation:
The choice between reusable and single-use ureteroscopes may depend more on logistical factors like cost and availability rather than clinical performance, suggesting a need for further research in diverse settings.
Limitations:
Single-center study may limit generalizability to broader populations.
Potential biases in patient selection and randomization could affect the validity of the findings.
Conclusion:
Both reusable and single-use ureteroscopes are viable options for ECIRS, with cost considerations playing a significant role in their selection, emphasizing the need for careful evaluation in clinical practice.
