Comparison of guide wires in urology. Which, when and why?
OBJECTIVE
We compared and contrasted various guide wires with regard to their physical properties as they apply to their use for the access or coaxial passage of other catheters.


METHODS
Certain 0.035-inch diameter guide wires were tested with regard to tip bending force, shaft bending force, pull force and tip puncture force, namely the Roadrunner PC and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) wire guide (Cook Urological, Spencer, Indiana), Glidewire, Bentson type 15 cm flexible tip PTFE coated guide wire and Amplatz super stiff Urowire XF (Boston Scientific Microvasive, Miami, Florida), Bentson guide wire and Amplatz guide wire (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, California) and the PTFE coated Bard guide wire (Bard Urological Division, Covington, Georgia).


RESULTS
Regarding guide wires used for access, the Boston Scientific PTFE guide wire with a 15 cm flexible tip required the least amount of force to deflect the tip. Of the 3 cm flexible tip guide wires the Applied Bentson guide wire had the most flexible tip and the Bard guide wire had the stiffest flexible tip. The Boston Scientific Glidewire required the least amount of force to pull from a tortuous pathway and this guide wire also required the greatest force (4 times as much force as the other guide wires) to puncture the aluminum foil (p < 0.001), indicating the safety of its tip. Regarding axial rigidity for the coaxial passage of other catheters over a guide wire, the Boston Scientific Amplatz super stiff guide wire was significantly more resistant to bending than all of the other guide wires that we tested (p < 0.05).


CONCLUSIONS
Brand name guide wires designed for the same purpose appear to differ markedly with regard to flexibility, lubricity and shaft stiffness. In general, floppy tip and nitinol based guide wires appear to be best used for access with an emphasis on tip flexibility and a low friction coating, while the stiffer shaft guide wires are selected for coaxial passage of catheters, stents and sheaths.
Clayman
Matthew
M
Department of Urology, University of California, Irvine, California, USA. rclayman@uci.edu
Uribe
Carlos A
CA
Eichel
Louis
L
Gordon
Zachary
Z
McDougall
Elspeth M
EM
Clayman
Ralph V
RV
D004867:Equipment Design; D015607:Stents; D014546:Urinary Catheterization / Q000295:instrumentation*