Future directions and research on the CVAC System for kidney stones

In this video, Thomas Chi, MD, MBA, discusses future directions for research and development of the CVAC System. Chi is a professor of urology, associate chair for Clinical Affairs, and the Kutzmann Endowed Professor in Clinical Urology at the University of California, San Francisco.

Transcription:

What are the potential future directions for research and development of the CVAC System? Are there any specific areas where you envision further improvements or additional applications?

Well, 1 of the things that I think is a difference between the CVAC first- and second-generation devices compared to the direction that traditional ureteroscopes are going is that, whether you're talking about reusable, single-use ureteroscopes, either one of those form factors, people are making smaller and smaller scopes. So it's pretty typical for folks to be advertising that they have a 7.9 Fr tip scope nowadays for ureteroscopy. Now, by comparison, the CVAC first- and second-generation devices have wider bore lumens, so they have a larger device in order to achieve good suction. So that's 1 space I think that brings 2 different questions up. One is, could you do CVAC, whether it's first- or second-generation procedures, without using an access sheath, so maybe save the patient a stent, if you can. And the second area of technology development to your original question is whether or not that same technology that's gone into making the CVAC System very efficient and effective for stone removal, can that be preserved using a smaller form factor? How small could you push the limits of a CVAC-type device, so that maybe you could do these without a stent, without an access sheath, and also more comfortably for the patients with a potentially lower risk for things like damage to the ureter. [One] of the things that makes the technology really interesting, in my mind, for CVAC, is that it's not just a suction device. In order to make the suction effective, they've changed the way that the irrigation comes out of the tip of the scope, and they've changed the way that the instruments come out of the tip of the scope. So those things have helped make the device more effective, so then can you preserve the things that are working great, but also shrink down the form factor? Those I imagine—this is just speculation on my part—but those are areas where I imagine there can be space for technology development.

This transcript was edited for clarity.