Evaluation of 2 inanimate models to improve percutaneous fluoroscopy-guided renalaccess time

Background Training devices for percutaneous renal access are expensive, have hazardous biological materials, or radiation. Two devices were designed that eliminate some or all of these characteristics (ManiPERC and iPERC). Objective To compare the improvement in access time to the posterior lower calix with 2 inanimate models in a group of urology residents. Material and methods Quasi-experimental clinical trial with 16 urology residents to compare the improvement over time of percutaneous renal access by training in 2 inanimate models (iPERC: simulated fluoroscopy and ManiPERC: real fluoroscopy). Results Subjects were assigned to one of 2 groups (iPERC and ManiPERC) and a video analysis of all of them was performed before and after 20 training sessions. Both groups improved their access time; with iPERC from 133.88 ± 41.40 to 76 ± 12.62 s ( p = 0.006) and from 176.5 ± 85.81 to 68.75–18.40 s ( p = 0.007) with ManiPERC. Comparing iPERC versus ManiPERC there was no difference between them in improving access time (ANCOVA: Model F (1.13) = 1.598, p = 0.228). Conclusions Both models are equivalent in improving skills; however, even though none of them generated bio-waste, the absence of radioactive emissions makes iPERC the more advantageous model.