How Endoscopy Founded Modern Urology

  • Friedrich H. MollEmail author
  • Dirk Schultheiss
Living reference work entry


Within the urologist daily work, the cystoscope, the deriving techniques in diagnosis and therapy, and the “view into the cavity” remain one of the most important activities, which define the specialty, as a specialty of its own. The knowledge about these “stories” helps us to understand our daily work in a more comprehensive way. The visualization together with the development of microscopy and histology served the purposes of a science-oriented medicine to be “objective”.


Cystoscopy Bladder Cavity Lichtleiter Human Body Cavities Bladder Tumor Treatment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Barnes RW, Bergman RT, Headly HL. Endoscopy. Berlin: Springer; 1959. p. 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beer E. Removal of neoplasm of the urinary bladder. A new method, employing high frequency (Oudin) currents through a catheterizing cystoscope. JAMA. 1910;52:1768–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Burri R. Doing Images. Zur Praxis medizinischer Bilder. Bielefeld: transcript; 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Casper L, Richter PF. Functional diagnosis of kidney disease with special reference to renal surgery. Philadelphia: Blakistons; 1903.Google Scholar
  5. Cruise FR. The endoscope as an aid to the diagnosis and treatment of disease. BMJ. 1865;1:345–7.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Desmoreaux AJ. The endoscope and its application to the diagnosis and treatment of affections of the genitourinary passages. Chicago Med J. 1867;24:177–94.Google Scholar
  7. Dewan PA. Congenital posterior urethral obstruction: the historical perspective. Pediatr Surg Int. 1997;12:86–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Edmonson JM. American surgical instruments an illustrated history of their manufacture and a directory of instrument makers to 1900. San Francisco: Norman Publishing; 1997. p. 132–3.Google Scholar
  9. Engel, R. Development of modern cystoscope an illustrated history medscape urology (Internet) 2007. Cited Nov 14, 2016 Available from
  10. Figdor PP. Philip Bozzini: the beginnings of modern endoscopy. Tuttlingen: Endo-Press; 2002.Google Scholar
  11. Fisher J. Instruments for illuminating dark cavities. Phil J Med. 1827;14:409.Google Scholar
  12. George Tiemann and Co. Catalogue of surgical instruments. New York; 1872.Google Scholar
  13. Goodman T. Ureteroscopy with pediatric cystoscope in adults. Urology. 1997;9:394–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Halling T, Moll F. Fachkulturelles Gedächtnis und Erinnerungsorte in den medizinischen Wissenschaften, Maximilian Nitze (1848–1906) und die Etablierung der Urologie. Urologe. 2016;55:1221–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Herr H. Max Nitze, the cystoscope and urology. J Urol. 2006;176:1313–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Jardin A, Moll F. A short history of the SIU with some emphasis on the early years of the AIU and the initial meetings of 1907–1914. Int. Nitze Leiter Society of Endoscopy, Grasl Druck, Bad Vöslau; 2011, p. 20–41.Google Scholar
  17. Marshall VF. Fiber optics in urology. J Urol. 1964;91:110–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Martin M. Die Evidenz des endoskopischen Bildes. In: Fangerau H, Müller I, editors. Faszinosum des Verborgenen. Der Harnstein und die (Re-)Präsentation des Unsichtbaren in der Urologie. Stuttgart: Steiner; 2012. p. 47–64.Google Scholar
  19. Martin M, Fangerau H. Einblicke nehmen – die Sichtbarmachung des Unsichtbaren in der Urologie. Zur Geschichte der Technik und Evidenz in der urologischen Endoskopie. Urologe. 2011a;50:1311–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Martin M, Fangerau H. Einblicke nehmen – die Sichtbarmachung des Unsichtbaren in der Urologie. Zur Geschichte der Technik und Evidenz in der urologischen Endoskopie. Urologe. 2011b;50:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moll F. Die Entwicklung der Indigokarminprobe unter Betrachtung ihrer Stellung in der funktionellen Nierendiagnostik. In: Voelcker F, Joseph E, editors. Funktionelle Nierendiagnostik ohne Ureterkatheter, Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift Bd. 50 (1903) Heft 48, 2081–2089, 2. Halbjahresband; Akt Urol. 1996; 27: A28–A33.Google Scholar
  22. Moll F, Pelger R. First steps in elector- urology: from Bottini to TUR prostate. In: Felderhof E, Mattelaer J, Moll F, Schultheiss D, van Kerrebroeck P, editors. Milestones in urology EUA. Leuven: Davidsfonds; 2015. p. 79–83.Google Scholar
  23. Moll F, Fischer N, Deutz F, Entwicklung v. Lithotripsie und Litholapaxie. Urologe B. 1990;30:95–100.Google Scholar
  24. Moll F, Rathert P, Fangerau H. Urologie und Nationalsozialismus am Beispiel von Leopold Casper (1859–1959). Urologe. 2009;48:1094–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Moll F, Schipper R, Blitz W. Cystoscopy and chromocystoscopy: two milestones outlining bladder visualisation and kidney function testing. In: Felderhof E, Mattelaer J, Moll F, Schultheiss D, van Kerrebroeck P, editors. Milestones in urology (EAU). Leuven: Davidsfonds Uitgeverij; 2015. p. 74–7.Google Scholar
  26. Moran ME. The light bulb, cystoscopy and Thomas Alva Edison. J Endourol. 2010;24(9):1395–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Moran, M. History of ureteroscopy. In: Monga M, editor. Ureteroscopy: indications, Instrumentation & Technique, current clinical urology. New York: Humana Press/Springer Business; 2014a, p. 3–12, p. 9.Google Scholar
  28. Moran, M. History of ureteroscopy. In: Monga, M, editor. Ureteroscopy: indications, Instrumentation & Technique, current clinical urology. New York: Humana Press/Springer Business; 2014b, p. 3–12, 10–11.Google Scholar
  29. Museum of Medico historical artefacts (Internet). Cited 15 11 2016. Available from
  30. Netzhat C. Netzhart’s history of endoscopy historical analysis of Endoscopy’s. Ascension since antiquity. Tuttlingen: Endo Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  31. Newell OK. The endoscopic instruments of Joseph Leiter of Vienna and the present development of endoscopy. Boston Med. 1887;117:528–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nitze M. Beiträge zur Endoscopie der männlichen Harnblase. Langenb Arch Klein Chir. 1881;36:661–732.Google Scholar
  33. Nitze M. Über intravesicale Operationen von Blasengeschwülste. Centralbl Chir. 1895;22:971–3.Google Scholar
  34. Otis WK. The „perfected“ urethroscope. New York: M. J. Rooney; 1893.Google Scholar
  35. Perez-Castro EE, Martinez-Piniero JA. Transurethral ureteroscopy – a current urological procedure. Arch Esp Urol. 1980;33:445–60.Google Scholar
  36. Quarrier S, Rabinowitz R. J Urol. 2017;197(4 Suppl): 1062, Surgical instrument company, Rochester, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  37. Reuter MA. Die Entwicklung der Endoskopietechnik in Amerika. In: Schultheiss D, Rathert P, Jonas U, editors. Streiflichter aus der Geschichte der Urologie. Heidelberg: Springer; 2000. p. 101–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reuter MA, Reuter HJ. The development of the cystoscope. J Urol. 1998;159:638–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Reuter M, Reuter H. The development of endoscopy in America. World J Urol. 1999;17:176–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Reuter M, Reuter HJ, Engel RM. History of endoscopy Vol I–IV. Tuttlingen: Endo Press; 1999. Vol I, p.19, 153, 163.Google Scholar
  41. Schultheiss D, Machtens SA, Jonas U. Air cystoscopy the history of an endoscopic technique from the late 19th century. BJU Intern. 1999;89:571–7.Google Scholar
  42. Segalas PR. Un moyen d’eclairer ‘uretre et la vessie de maniere a voir dans l’interieur de ces organs. Revue Medicale Francaise et de L’etrangere. 1827; 1:157–158.Google Scholar
  43. Takagi T, Go T, Takayasu H, Aso Y. Fiberoptic pyeloureteroscopy. Surgery. 1971;70:661–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Takayasu H, Aso Y. Recent development for pyeloureteroscopy: guide tube method for this introduction into the ureter. J Urol. 1974;112:176–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Young HH, McKay RW. Congenital valvular obstruction of the prostatic urethra. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1929;48 509–35.Google Scholar
  46. Zorgniotti AW. Bladder cancer in the pre- cystocopic era. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1984;162:A 1–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kliniken der Stadt Köln gGmbH, Urologische KlinikKölnGermany
  2. 2.Klinik für UrologieEvangelisches Krankenhaus MittelhessenGiessenGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Wolfgang Otto
    • 1
  • Shahrokh F. Shariat
    • 2
  1. 1.der Universität RegensburgOberarzt der Klinik für UrologieRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.Departement of UrologyWeill Cornell Medical CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations