Does Variable Clamping Pressure Endanger Urologic Prosthetic Tubing?

IF 2.1 3区医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY

Urology Pub Date : 2025-06-28 DOI:10.1016/j.urology.2025.06.062

Logan W Grimaud, Jeremy A Kurnot, Matthew Salvino, Andrew C Peterson, Aaron C Lentz

{"title":"Does Variable Clamping Pressure Endanger Urologic Prosthetic Tubing?","authors":"Logan W Grimaud, Jeremy A Kurnot, Matthew Salvino, Andrew C Peterson, Aaron C Lentz","doi":"10.1016/j.urology.2025.06.062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To evaluate the impact of variable rubber-shod hemostat (RSH) clamp pressures on urologic prosthesis tubing (UPT) integrity.Methods: UPT segments were placed into four groups: control, RSH one-click, RSH three-click, or bare hemostat one-click. All experimental groups were clamped for 60 seconds at the point of intervention. Linear force was applied to the tubing until the UPT separated into 2 pieces. Force at the time of failure (FF), tear location, and incidence of leakage before tearing were recorded. Scanning electron microscope images were evaluated for UPT damage from each intervention.Results: The protocol was completed 10 times per group (40 total). Median FF was 99.4 N (79.9-106.5), 104.8 N (78.1-111.0), 97.2 N (74.6-106.5), and 98.1 N (87.9-107.4) for control, RSH one-click, RSH three-click, and bare hemostat one-click, respectively (P = .34). Tear location appeared random for all groups other than the bare hemostat one-click group, which tore at the point of intervention in 6 of 10 (60%) experiments (P = .000082). Only the bare hemostat one-click intervention caused leaking before a complete tear in 2 of 10 (20%) experiments. On scanning electron microscope imaging, only the bare hemostat damaged the surface of the UPT.Conclusion: RSH clamp pressures did not significantly compromise the durability of UPT; however, bare hemostats cause surface damage with a loss of material integrity.","PeriodicalId":23415,"journal":{"name":"Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2025.06.062","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the impact of variable rubber-shod hemostat (RSH) clamp pressures on urologic prosthesis tubing (UPT) integrity.

Methods: UPT segments were placed into four groups: control, RSH one-click, RSH three-click, or bare hemostat one-click. All experimental groups were clamped for 60 seconds at the point of intervention. Linear force was applied to the tubing until the UPT separated into 2 pieces. Force at the time of failure (FF), tear location, and incidence of leakage before tearing were recorded. Scanning electron microscope images were evaluated for UPT damage from each intervention.

Results: The protocol was completed 10 times per group (40 total). Median FF was 99.4 N (79.9-106.5), 104.8 N (78.1-111.0), 97.2 N (74.6-106.5), and 98.1 N (87.9-107.4) for control, RSH one-click, RSH three-click, and bare hemostat one-click, respectively (P = .34). Tear location appeared random for all groups other than the bare hemostat one-click group, which tore at the point of intervention in 6 of 10 (60%) experiments (P = .000082). Only the bare hemostat one-click intervention caused leaking before a complete tear in 2 of 10 (20%) experiments. On scanning electron microscope imaging, only the bare hemostat damaged the surface of the UPT.

Conclusion: RSH clamp pressures did not significantly compromise the durability of UPT; however, bare hemostats cause surface damage with a loss of material integrity.

查看原文本刊更多论文

可变夹紧压力是否危及泌尿系统假体管？

目的：探讨可变橡胶止血钳（RSH）钳压对泌尿系统假管（UPT）完整性的影响。方法：将UPT段分为对照组、RSH一键组、RSH三键组和裸止血钳一键组。所有实验组在干预点（POI）夹紧60秒。在油管上施加线性力，直到UPT分离成2段。记录失效时的力（FF）、撕裂位置和撕裂前的泄漏发生率。扫描电镜（SEM）图像评估了每次干预对UPT的损害。结果：每组完成10次（共40次）。对照组、RSH一键、RSH三键和裸止血药一键的中位FF分别为99.4 N（79.9-106.5）、104.8 N（78.1-111.0）、97.2 N（74.6-106.5）和98.1 N (87.9-107.4) （P=0.34）。除裸眼止血钳一键组外，其余各组的撕裂位置均为随机，10个实验中有6个（60%）在POI处撕裂（p=0.000082）。在10例（20%）的实验中，只有2例使用裸眼止血钳一键干预导致完全撕裂前渗漏。扫描电镜显示，只有裸露的止血钳损伤了UPT表面。结论：RSH钳压对UPT的耐久性无明显影响；然而，裸露的止血器会造成表面损伤，失去材料的完整性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

9.50%

发文量

716

审稿时长

59 days

期刊介绍： Urology is a monthly, peer–reviewed journal primarily for urologists, residents, interns, nephrologists, and other specialists interested in urology The mission of Urology®, the "Gold Journal," is to provide practical, timely, and relevant clinical and basic science information to physicians and researchers practicing the art of urology worldwide. Urology® publishes original articles relating to adult and pediatric clinical urology as well as to clinical and basic science research. Topics in Urology® include pediatrics, surgical oncology, radiology, pathology, erectile dysfunction, infertility, incontinence, transplantation, endourology, andrology, female urology, reconstructive surgery, and medical oncology, as well as relevant basic science issues. Special features include rapid communication of important timely issues, surgeon''s workshops, interesting case reports, surgical techniques, clinical and basic science review articles, guest editorials, letters to the editor, book reviews, and historical articles in urology.