Ureteral Stents Improving Comfort, Safety and Efficacy

A recent Boston Children Hospital study evaluating biofilm growth and bacterial resistant properties indicated Q Urological pAguaMedicina Pediatric Ureteral Stents compared to Boston Scientific hydrophilic coated ureteral stents exposed to Escherichia coli over 15 days demonstrated significant reductions, (up to 71%) in bacterial counts suggesting reduced infection associated with in-vivo usage can be expected.

Q Urological pAguamedicina structural hydrogel Ureteral Stent are intended to improve comfort, safety and efficacy; providing enhancements over currently available devices. Q Urological pAguamedicina structural hydrogel Ureteral Stents which are based on proprietary materials and manufacturing processes result in very soft devices expected to minimize patient discomfort. More to the point, Q Urological pAguamedicina structural hydrogel devices are not a coated substrate, and not an antimicrobial system, but rather a antifouling highly aqueous (90%) all hydrogel device. Like a hydrophilic coating, Q Urological pAguamedicina structural hydrogel devices are slippery, but always wet throughout with a significant volume of aqueous content, which reduces the surface area bacteria can adhere to.

And while more studies are required to confirm these findings, clinically there is little doubt hydrophilic media provides excellent biocompatibility. Accordingly plans to expand the use of Q Urological pAguamedicina structural hydrogel as a raw material in additional urinary products is moving forward. Focused on Q Urological pAguamedicina structural hydrogel performance characteristics, both long and short term applications such as incontinence and prostate stents and catheters are initial applications that will benefit from the reduction in infection, and discomfort typically exhibited by currently available products  Looking at the approximate 650,000 domestic ureteral stent market which exhibits an incidence of about 40% related to patient discomfort and infection at a combined device and procedure cost of about $350.00; the savings would be dramatic. This philosophy applied to urethral drainage, as well as chronic long term applications would result in dramatic healthcare savings.