Objective To compare the efficiency and safety of double-channel flexible ureteroscopy and electronic flexible ureteroscopy.Methods From April 2007 to 2016 July, clinical data of 836 cases flexible ureteroscopic holmium laser lithotripsy were collected. All the patients were randomly divided into electronic lfexible ureteroscopy group (n = 427) and double-channel lfexible ureteroscopy group (n = 409), the operation time, success rate of surgery, complications, residual stone rate of the two groups were compared.Results The success rate of surgery was 92.5% and 83.6% of the two groups respectively, the difference was significant (P < 0.05); postoperative systemic inlfammatory response syndrome (SIRS) were occurred in 10 cases and 13 cases respectively, which were cured and the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05); the average operation time was (81.1 ± 7.9) min and (95.3 ± 7.6) min respectively, the difference was significant (P < 0.05); The formation of stone street of electronic lfexible ureteroscopy group and double-channel lfexible ureteroscopy group were 17 cases and 25 cases. The residual stone rate of electronic flexible ureteroscopy group and double-channel flexible ureteroscopy group were 6 cases and 8 cases, of them were cleared after extracorporeal shockwave lithotrips (ESWL). There were no difference between the two groups (P > 0.05).Conclusion Both double-channel lfexible ureteroscopy and electronic lfexible ureteroscopy are effective and safe therapeutic modalities. Electronic flexible ureteroscopy is better than double-channel lfexible ureteroscopy in success rate of surgery because of its high deifnition and lfexible operation.