CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03087812Updated Apr 10, 2018

Durability of Flexible Ureteroscopes and Causes of Infection During Flexible Ureterorenoscopy

An observational study in Kidney Stones, sponsored by Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society. Completed at 1 site in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2018-04-10.

Sponsored by Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
400
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This is an observational study in which data on consecutive patients who undergo ureterorenoscopy with the use of a flexible ureterorenoscope are collected. In total 20 new ureteroscopes are usedfrom Olympus andfrom Storz) to study the durability of the ureteroscopes and the possible microbiological load.

Read the detailed description

This is an observational study in which data on consecutive patients who undergo ureterorenoscopy with the use of a flexible ureterorenoscope are collected. In total 6 new ureteroscopes are used (3 from Olympus and 3 from Storz) to study the durability of the ureteroscopes and the possible microbiological load.

Before the procedure is started the endoscope is tested for its microbiological load in two different ways:1. Shake the tip of the flexible ureterorenoscope 5 seconds in a sterile container filled with 10 cc of NaCl 0.9% 2. Flush the working channel of the ureterorenoscope with 10 cc of NaCl 0.9% and collect the sample in a sterile container.

After the procedure is finished, the endoscope is tested for its microbiological load in two different ways:

  1. Shake the tip of the flexible ureterorenoscope 5 seconds in a sterile container filled with 10 cc of NaCl 0.9% 2. Flush the working channel of the ureterorenoscope with 10 cc of NaCl 0.9% and collect the sample in a sterile container.

Transfer all samples to the lab as soon as possible but at least within four hours after collecting the samples.

As for the clinical efficacy during each procedure a detailed questionnaire about the use of each ureteroscope is filled out. This includes the ease of use making mention on quality of the image, torque, flexibility and durability.

Data will be collected through electronic case report forms (eCFRs), with use of an online Data Management system (DMS).

02

Conditions studied

  • Kidney Stones

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Microbiological burden
  • kidney
  • stone
  • durability of flexible endoscopes
03

In context

Kidney Calculi

598 studies on the registry are indexed under Kidney Calculi; 163 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 400 is above the median of 144 across 110 observational studies indexed under Kidney Calculi.

Browse Kidney Calculi studies →

Lead sponsor

Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society is the lead sponsor of 8 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

The study population compromises those patients of over eighteen years old diagnosed to undergo a ureterorenoscopy (diagnostic or therapeutic) with a flexible ureterorenoscope.

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patient presented with a diagnosis to undergo a ureterorenoscopy using a flexible ureterorenoscope
  • over 18 years
  • has signed informed consent
  • the patient is being treated with the designated flexible ureterorenoscope
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
400 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Microbiological load

    To evaluate the pre-operative microbiological load of the tip and the working channel of the most common used flexible ureteroscopes, after high level disinfection

    Time frame: 2 years

Secondary outcomes

  1. Durability

    To evaluate the durability of the most common used flexible ureteroscopes in terms of number of procedures, total use time and total degrees of flexibility loss until the first repair is needed.

    Time frame: 2 years

  2. Factors affecting durability

    To evaluate descriptive data on factors that may affect the durability of the flexible ureteroscopes. Factors measured are treatment time, treatment indication and anatomical location in the urinary tract, method of ureteroscope insertion number and type of accessory instrumentation through the working channel, difference in users, number of forcing the scope during the procedure and the number of disinfections.

    Time frame: 2 years

07

Study locations

1 site
  • AMC University Hospital
    Amsterdam, 1105AZ, Netherlands
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 10, 2018, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03087812
Lead sponsor
Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 23, 2017
Start date
Dec 2015
Primary completion
Dec 2017
Completion
Dec 2017
Last update
Apr 10, 2018

Study contacts

Jean de la Rosette, MD, PhD
study chair · Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2018. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion