Purpose: To evaluate the efficiency and efficacy of two common and commercially available methods to resolve lens fogging: a Fluid Warming System (O.R. Solutions, Chantilly, VA) and the Clearify Visualization System (Covidien, Mansfield, MA).
Material and methods: We prospectively evaluated 40 patients undergoing laparoscopic renal procedures with the Fluid Warming System (first 20 cases) and then the Clearify Visualization System (second 20 cases). We utilized the standard Fluid Warming System per a 30-second modified protocol established in our laboratory. We used the Clearify according to manufacturer instructions. For each procedure we documented the etiology of each episode of visual obstruction, procedure type and surgery duration. We performed a cost analysis. For all cases we used the same insufflator, insufflation trocar location and trocar configuration.
Results: All 40 patients completed the study protocol without incident. The mean fogging events per hour for the Fluid Warming System and Clearify Visualization System were 0.7 (0-2.52) and 1.4 (0-5.02), respectively (P = 0.045). Surgery duration and cost per procedure were similar for both systems.
Conclusion: The Fluid Warming System with modified technique was found to have less fogging events than the Clearify Visualization System, with no difference in operative time or cost.
Keywords: Clearify visualization system; fluid warming system; lens fogging; visual obstruction.