Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 23, 2026
A Murine Model of Stent Implantation in the Carotid Artery for the Study of Restenosis
Published on: May 14, 2013
Comparison of nitinol tipless stone baskets in an in vitro caliceal model
Stephen Lukasewycz1, Jason Skenazy, Nathan Hoffman
1Department of Urologic Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 55455, USA.
Purpose:
Tipless stone baskets facilitate caliceal calculi extraction during flexible ureteroscopy. We evaluated the stone capture rate of 9 commercially available tipless stone baskets in an in vitro model using novice and expert operators.
Materials And Methods:
The Microvasive Zerotip (2.4Fr, 3.0Fr), Cook N-Circle (2.2Fr, 3.0Fr, 3.2Fr), Bard Dimension (3.0Fr, Sacred Heart Medical Halo (1.9Fr), Vantage (1.9Fr) and Circon-ACMI Sur-Catch-NT (3.0Fr) were tested by 3 novice and 3 experienced basket operators. Each operator performed stone extraction of 2, 5 and 8 mm calculi (size determined by digital caliper with 3 repetitions of each basket. The time to extraction of the calculus from a convex based test tube caliceal model was recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using repeated measures ANOVA and Fisher's pairwise comparisons.
Results:
After a learning curve of 27 basket retrievals, there was no significant difference in stone capture times between novice (38 +/- 54 seconds) and expert operators (32 +/- 49 seconds, p = 0.174). For total stone capture (all sizes) the Sacred Heart Halo resulted in the most rapid stone extraction (17 +/- 14 seconds) by novices and experts, while the Sur-Catch NT resulted in the slowest stone extraction (78 +/- 90, seconds, p = 0.001). The Halo (14 +/- 9 seconds) and Vantage (19 +/- 12 seconds) baskets were significantly faster for 2 mm calculi than the N-Circle (73 +/- 60 seconds, p = 0.006), Sur-Catch (169 +/- 85 seconds, p = 0.0005) and Dimension (73 +/- 70 seconds, p = 0.017). The Zerotip functioned well for 2 mm calculi in the hands of expert operators (15 +/- 9 seconds) but not novice operators (94 +/- 95 seconds). The Sur-Catch NT was significantly slower for 2 mm calculi than the N-Circle (p = 0.01), Dimension (p =.03), Halo (p =.0005), Vantage (p =.001) and Zerotip (p =.002). For 5 mm calculi the Halo was superior (12 +/- 8 seconds), while the Zerotip were superior for 8 mm calculi (8 +/- 3 seconds) compared to the N-Circle (23 +/- 28 seconds, p = 0.026), Halo (26 +/- 18 seconds, p = 0.021) and Vantage (23 +/- 15 seconds, p = 0.006).
Conclusions:
The Sacred Heart Halo and Vantage baskets resulted in the most expeditious stone extraction, especially for 2 to 5 mm calculi while the Microvasive Zerotip was optimal for 8 mm calculi. The Sur-Catch NT had the slowest stone capture rate for all stone sizes. Caliceal models of stone basketing may be useful to train novice urology residents and nursing assistants.
