Browsing by Author "Heinsimer, Kevin"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Survey of Morcellator Preference and Cost Comparison of the Lumenis VersaCut and Wolf Piranha Morcellators
    (Elsevier, 2017) Rivera, Marcelino E.; Lingeman, James E.; Heinsimer, Kevin; York, Nadya E.; Krambeck, Amy E.; Urology, School of Medicine
    Objective To evaluate operating room (OR) costs associated with the 2 available morcellators in the United States in a matched cohort and to determine benign prostatic hyperplasia surgeon's morcellator preference. Materials and Methods Patients from 2013, the last year our institution exclusively used the VersaCut device, were matched 1:1 with the most recent patient cohort, utilizing the Wolf Piranha morcellator. Cost of morcellation including the expense of OR time and disposable instrument costs were calculated. A survey to the Endourological Society e-mail listserv was sent to determine morcellator preference. Results We identified 142 patients who underwent holmium laser enucleation of the prostate in 2013. When compared with the VersaCut group, morcellation efficiency (4.4 vs 7.0 g/min, P <.01) and expense of OR time ($1420.80 vs $992.21, P <.005) both favored the Piranha morcellator system even when the costs of disposable instruments were factored into the analysis ($1338.81 vs $1637.50, P <.05). A total of 126 urologists responded to the survey. Of these, 56 (44.5%) perform transurethral prostate enucleations, which included 48 (86%) holmium. More endourologists use the VersaCut (n = 33, 59%) than the Piranha (n = 24, 43%) morcellator. Qualities that impacted the preference of morcellator included the preferred device is safer, faster, easier to use, reusable, and less expensive. Conclusion We identified a significant improved efficiency and improved cost savings utilizing the Piranha morcellator even when controlling for disposable costs. Of the endourologists who responded to the survey, less than half perform transurethral enucleation. Morcellator preference is largely based on safety, efficiency, and ease of use, whereas cost and reusablility were of lesser importance.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Survey Regarding Preference in the Management of Bilateral Stone Disease and a Comparison of Clavien Complication Rates in Bilateral vs Unilateral Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy
    (Elsevier, 2017) Rivera, Marcelino E.; Bhojani, Naeem; Heinsimer, Kevin; El Tayeb, Marawan M.; Paonessa, Jessica E.; Krambeck, Amy E.; Lingeman, James E.; Urology, School of Medicine
    Objective To discuss complications of simultaneous bilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy (SB-PCNL) when compared with unilateral percutaneous nephrolithotomy and survey surgeon preference in bilateral stone disease management. Patients and Methods A database of all participating percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) patients who underwent treatment at Indiana University Health Methodist Hospital within a 10-year period from 2006 to 2015 by a single surgeon (JL) was utilized. Perioperative data, as well as complications, defined according to the Clavien grading system, were recorded. A survey of members of the Endourological Society was performed regarding surgical management in the setting of bilateral stone disease. Results A total of 563 patients were identified over the study period with 129 undergoing SB-PCNL. Overall, SB-PCNL patients had a longer procedure (176.9 vs 115.6 minutes, P <.0001), were more likely to undergo a secondary procedure (73% vs 44, P <.001), and had a longer hospital stay (3.2 vs 2.3 days, P <.001). Notably, there were no differences in the number or the severity of complications between the 2 groups. A total of 153 endourologists completed the survey. Of these endourologists, 58 (38%) performed bilateral PCNL under anesthesia. The top reasons for electing not to perform bilateral PCNLs included the duration of bilateral procedures (53%), bilateral renal injury (48%), and rare performance of bilateral surgery (35%). Conclusion Although the procedure length was longer in the SB-PCNL group, there were similar rates of complications and severity between unilateral PCNL and SB-PCNL. A majority of endourologists surveyed do not perform bilateral PCNL but would perform bilateral ureteroscopy with the duration of the procedure and concern for bilateral renal injury representing the most common reasons.