PD13-03 ENDOCKSCOPE: USING MOBILE TECHNOLOGY TO CREATE GLOBAL POINT OF SERVICE ENDOSCOPY

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyTechnology & Instruments: Laparoscopy - Benign & Malignant Disease1 Apr 2014PD13-03 ENDOCKSCOPE: USING MOBILE TECHNOLOGY TO CREATE GLOBAL POINT OF SERVICE ENDOSCOPY Renai Yoon, Samir Shreim, Atreya Dash, Ralph Clayman, William Sohn, and Hak J. Lee Renai YoonRenai Yoon More articles by this author , Samir ShreimSamir Shreim More articles by this author , Atreya DashAtreya Dash More articles by this author , Ralph ClaymanRalph Clayman More articles by this author , William SohnWilliam Sohn More articles by this author , and Hak J. LeeHak J. Lee More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.988AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Technological advances in mobile technology have served as a precursor to new innovations in healthcare. Herein, we present our findings in the use of the 2nd generation Endockscope, a specialized lens and docking system with an incorporated LED light source that promotes the coupling of a smartphone (iPhone 4S) with modern fiber-optic endoscopes. METHODS Measurements were performed to compare the weight (lbs) and lumens output (lux) of the Endockscope system with incorporated LED light source to standard HD endoscopic equipment with wired xenon light source. A cost comparison was also done to compare the two systems. Image resolution (line pairs/mm) was compared using a USAF resolution target (Edmund Optics, NJ) and flexible cystoscope (Storz, Germany) coupled to both the Endockscope-iPhone and a HD camera (Storz H3-Z Versatile HD Camera). A 30° laparoscope and a Munsell ColorChecker chart were used to compare color resolution. Finally, cystoscopic and ureteroscopic images taken of a porcine model with both systems were blindly compared and evaluated by 5 expert endoscopists using a Likert scale. RESULTS The weight of the Endockscope system with incorporated LED light source was 0.67 lbs and the Storz HD camera and light cable was 2.07 lbs. The incorporated LED light source yielded 3.27% of the lumens output of a standard xenon light source (1589.4 vs. 48580 lux). The overall cost of the mobile-coupled system with incorporated LED light source was $624 compared to $64,378 for a standard system. The image resolution was same for both systems (4.49 vs 4.49 lp/mm). Blue (ΔE = 36.5 vs. 35.8) and green (ΔE = 33.3 vs. 39.6) demonstrated similar color resolution for both systems. Red (ΔE = 33.3 vs. 14.1) demonstrated better color resolution for Storz HD Camera. Evaluation of cystoscopic images acquired with the Storz camera were superior in image (4.4 vs. 3.2), color (4.0 vs. 2.8), and overall quality (4.2 vs. 3.4) (p= 0.001, .016. 0.049). Evaluations of ureteroscopic images yielded no statistical difference in image quality (4.2 vs. 3.4) and color (3.6 vs. 3.2) (p= 0.120, 0.310), while overall quality was superior for the Storz system (4.1 vs. 3.2) (p=0.027). All experts concluded that the images taken acceptable for therapeutic and diagnostic use. CONCLUSIONS The Endockscope system demonstrated the optimized coupling of modern endoscopes to a mobile device. The mobile coupled device with incorporated LED light source was found to be lighter and less expensive in comparison to standard systems. The device also acquired images of the same resolution and color and yielded overall good reviews by experts. © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e353 Peer Review Report Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014MetricsAuthor Information Renai Yoon More articles by this author Samir Shreim More articles by this author Atreya Dash More articles by this author Ralph Clayman More articles by this author William Sohn More articles by this author Hak J. Lee More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...