Comparison of Physician Perception Between Single-Use Versus Reusable Flexible Bronchoscope for Basic and Advanced...

Single-use flexible bronchoscopes (SUFB) offer potential advantages over reusable flexible bronchoscopes (RFB), including cost-effectiveness, reduced infection risk, and improved accessibility. Although widely used for basic procedures in ICU settings, their performance in advanced procedures remains understudied.

A single-center pilot study was completed to compare the user experience of VathinH-SteriScope SUFB and Olympus BF-1TH190 RFB among general and interventional pulmonologists using low-fidelity simulation with a mannequin. Participants evaluated scope performance on image quality, ergonomics, maneuverability, tool interaction, and overall usability using a Likert scale (1 to 5).

The participants consisted of 13 general pulmonologists and 8 interventional pulmonologists who had 3 to 6 years and 4 to 21 years of bronchoscopy experience, respectively. For basic bronchoscopic procedures, the RFB scored higher overall (4.57±0.72 vs. 4.23±0.75; P<0.01), although both scored above 4 across all parameters. RFB was favored by 55% of participants, whereas 38% indicated no preference. In advanced procedures, the RFB also outperformed the SUFB, particularly for cryoprobe-assisted foreign body removal and percutaneous tracheostomy placement. However, the SUFB demonstrated comparable or even superior performance in specific scenarios, such as stent placement and balloon dilation attributed to its larger working channel, despite both scopes having the same outer diameter.

This mannequin-based simulation study concludes that SUFBs, represented in this study by the Vathin SUFB, have comparable performance to traditional RFBs in both basic and advanced bronchoscopic procedures. SUFBs could be an alternative to RFBs in modern interventional pulmonary practice with further evaluation through high-fidelity testing and human studies.