Thulium fiber laser: the new player for kidney stone treatment? A comparison with Holmium:YAG laser

Monitoring Intrarenal temperature changes during Ho: YAG laser lithotripsy in patients undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery: a novel pilot study

Ho: YAG laser lithotripsy is widely used for urinary stone treatment, but concerns persist regarding its thermal effects on renal tissues. This study aimed to monitor intrarenal temperature changes during kidney stone treatment using retrograde intrarenal surgery with Ho: YAG laser. Fifteen patients were enrolled. Various laser power settings (0.8 J/10 Hz, 1.2 J/12 Hz) and irrigation modes (10 cc/min, 15 cc/min, 20 cc/min, gravity irrigation, and manual pump irrigation) were used. A sterile thermal probe was attached to a flexible ureterorenoscope and delivered into the calyceal system via the ureteral access sheath. Temperature changes were recorded with a T-type thermal probe with ± 0.1 °C accuracy. Laser power significantly influenced mean temperature, with a 4.981 °C difference between 14 W and 8 W laser power (p < 0.001). The mean temperature was 2.075 °C higher with gravity irrigation and 2.828 °C lower with manual pump irrigation (p = 0.038 and p = 0.005, respectively). Body mass index, laser power, irrigation model, and operator duty cycle explained 49.5% of mean temperature variability (Adj. R2 = 0.495). Laser power and operator duty cycle positively impacted mean temperature, while body mass index and specific irrigation models affected it negatively. Laser power and irrigation rate are critical for intrarenal temperature during Ho: YAG laser lithotripsy. Optimal settings and irrigation strategies are vital for minimizing thermal injury risk. This study underscores the need for ongoing research to understand and mitigate thermal effects during laser lithotripsy.

Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet for Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Thulium fiber laser (TFL) emerged as a competitor of holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for the treatment of urinary stones.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy of renal and ureteral stones.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases to identify reports published until May 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) between Ho:YAG and TFL for laser lithotripsy.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria, and data from 1286 and 880 patients who underwent, respectively, Ho:YAG and TFL laser lithotripsy were reviewed. Most studies included ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgeries as procedures, two included percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and one included URS exclusively. Only two studies reported results in pediatric patients. TFL was associated with a higher SFR (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-3.20; p = 0.031) when no residual fragment is considered, but not when SFR refers to the presence of fragments <3 mm (OR 2.48, 95% CI: 0.98-6.29; p = 0.055) or when only Ho:YAG with MOSES is considered (p = 0.068). According to the stones' location, TFL was associated with higher SFRs than Ho:YAG for renal (OR 3.14, 95% CI: 1.69-5.86; p < 0.001) but not for ureteral (p = 0.8) stones. TFL was associated with a lower intraoperative complication rate (OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.19-0.63; p < 0.001). No difference was found in major (p = 0.4) or overall (p = 0.4) complication rate, operative time (p = 0.051), and laser time (p = 0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

TFL is a promising laser for the treatment of urinary stones with some advantages over Ho:YAG. Further high-quality studies are needed to confirm these findings and optimize the surgical settings.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The use of thulium fiber laser rather than holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet permits to reach a higher stone-free rate in stones located in the kidney rather than in the ureter.

[Thulium or holmium laser or both: where will the journey take us?]

The Holmium:YAG laser has been the gold standard for laser lithotripsy over the past three decades and, since the late 1990s, also for prostate enucleation. Pulsed thulium fibre lasers (TFL) demonstrated their efficacy in in-vitro experiments and were introduced to the market a few years ago. Initial clinical results for TFL in lithotripsy and enucleation are very promising. In addition to TFL, a pulsed Thulium:YAG solid-state laser has been introduced, but clinical data for this laser are currently limited. This article aims to review the key technological differences between Ho:YAG lasers and pulsed thulium lasers and compare/discuss the initial clinical results for stone lithotripsy and laser enucleation.In-vitro studies have demonstrated the technical superiority of TFL compared with Ho:YAG lasers. However, as TFL is still a new technology, only limited studies are available to date, and optimal settings for lithotripsy have not been established. For enucleation, the differences of TFL compared with a high-power Ho:YAG laser seem to be clinically irrelevant. Initial studies on pulsed Tm:YAG lasers show good results, but there continues to be a lack of comparative studies.Based on the current literature, pulsed thulium lasers have the potential of being an alternative to Ho:YAG lasers. However, further studies are necessary to determine the optimal laser technology for enucleation and lithotripsy of urinary stones, considering all parameters, including efficacy, safety, and cost.

Holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser with MOSES technology is more efficient than thulium fibre laser in supine mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy

OBJECTIVES

To address the paucity of literature comparing outcomes achieved with utilisation of the high-power holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser with MOSES technology vs those achieved with the thulium fibre laser (TFL) in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing supine mini-PCNL between August 2021 and May 2023. Exclusion criteria were urinary diversion, simultaneous utilisation of >1 laser platform, use of any other form of fragmentation, and ureteric stones. The Ho:YAG platform (Lumenis Pulse P120H™ with MOSES technology, 120W; Boston Scientific®) and the TFL (Soltive SuperPulsed Thulium Fibre [SPTF], 60W; Olympus®) were compared. Data on stone-free rate (SFR) were determined by computed tomography performed on the first postoperative day and presented as absence of stone fragments, no fragments larger than 2 mm, or no fragments larger than 4 mm.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients met the inclusion criteria, 51 mini-PCNLs with the Ho:YAG laser and 49 with the SPTF laser. No significant differences in demographics or stone characteristics were detected between the two groups. The Ho:YAG laser utilised less energy and time, resulting in higher ablation efficiency (P < 0.05) and less total operating time (P < 0.05). Overall, there was no difference in SFR in any category between the Ho:YAG group and the SPTF group (no fragments: relative risk [RR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.12, P = 0.21; fragments <2 mm: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.67-1.10, P = 0.23; fragments <4 mm: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80-1.15, P = 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Although we observed an equivalent postoperative SFR, this study supports a shorter operating time and greater intra-operative laser efficiency with the Ho:YAG laser over the SPTF laser in mini-PCNL.

What is the definition of stone dust and how does it compare with clinically insignificant residual fragments? A comprehensive review

PURPOSE

During endoscopic stone surgery, Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL) technologies allow to pulverize urinary stones into fine particles, ie DUST. Yet, currently there is no consensus on the exact definition of DUST. This review aimed to define stone DUST and Clinically Insignificant Residual Fragments (CIRF).

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE (PubMed) and Cochrane databases were searched for both in vitro and in vivo articles relating to DUST and CIRF definitions, in November 2023, using keyword combinations: "dust", "stones", "urinary calculi", "urolithiasis", "residual fragments", "dusting", "fragments", "lasers" and "clinical insignificant residual fragments".

RESULTS

DUST relates to the fine pulverization of urinary stones, defined in vitro as particles spontaneously floating with a sedimentation duration ≥ 2 sec and suited for aspiration through a 3.6Fr-working channel (WC) of a flexible ureteroscope (FURS). Generally, an upper size limit of 250 µm seems to agree with the definition of DUST. Ho:YAG with and without "Moses Technology", TFL and the recent pulsed-Thulium:YAG (pTm:YAG) can produce DUST, but no perioperative technology can currently measure DUST size. The TFL and pTm:YAG achieve better dusting compared to Ho:YAG. CIRF relates to residual fragments (RF) that are not associated with imminent stone-related events: loin pain, acute renal colic, medical or interventional retreatment. CIRF size definition has decreased from older studies based on Shock Wave Lithotripsy (SWL) (≤ 4 mm) to more recent studies based on FURS (≤ 2 mm) and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy(PCNL) (≤ 4 mm). RF ≤ 2 mm are associated with lower stone recurrence, regrowth and clinical events rates. While CIRF should be evaluated postoperatively using Non-Contrast Computed Tomography(NCCT), there is no consensus on the best diagnostic modality to assess the presence and quantity of DUST.

CONCLUSION

DUST and CIRF refer to independent entities. DUST is defined in vitro by a stone particle size criteria of 250 µm, translating clinically as particles able to be fully aspirated through a 3.6Fr-WC without blockage. CIRF relates to ≤ 2 RF on postoperative NCCT.

Analyzing global research trends and focal points in the utilization of laser techniques for the treatment of urolithiasis from 1978 to 2022: visualization and bibliometric analysis

Laser lithotripsy is gaining global prominence and is a dynamically progressing field marked by a continual influx of new and comprehensive research each year. Recently, there has been a noticeable shift toward the adoption of various kinds of lasers, such as holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber (TFL) lasers. Consequently, we aim to conduct a bibliometric analysis to analyze key areas of research activity within scientific publications that center on the utilization of laser techniques in urolithiasis. A search of the literature spanning from 1978 to 2022 was carried out on 25 December 2023 using the Scopus database to explore research related to the application of laser techniques for urolithiasis treatment. Visualization analysis was performed using VOSviewer software (version 1.6.20). We examined 962 publications that met the specified criteria, 791 (82.22%) of which were original articles. The analysis of the retrieved publications indicated a consistent increase in research output from 1978 to 2022; a particularly noteworthy surge occurred after 2003. In particular, the U.S. claimed the leading position as the most productive country, contributing 211 articles (21.93%). However, India had the highest research productivity according to the adjustment index of 19.08. In the European region, 324 publications (33.68% of the total) originated from 25 countries. The Journal of Endourology contributed the most between 1978 and 2022 (n = 96, 9.98%). The most cited paper examined the effectiveness of holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) lasers, while a subsequent study focused on the use of a thulium fiber laser (TFL), an emerging laser technology that has gained increased recognition. Co-occurrence analysis revealed three distinct clusters focusing on the types of laser technology, minimally invasive approaches, and success rate/postoperative complications. This comprehensive investigation delves into the global landscape of laser use for the treatment of urolithiasis. This review supports the emerging clinical concept of using various types of laser technology for urolithiasis treatment. Moreover, the hot issues that researchers should focus on based on the findings of this study are the use of different types of laser lithotripsy in view of the surgical approach, success rate and complications.

Is "Kidney Stone Calculator" efficient in predicting ureteroscopic lithotripsy duration? A holmium:YAG and thulium fiber lasers comparative analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the ability of Kidney Stone Calculator (KSC), a flexible ureteroscopy surgical planning software, to predict the lithotripsy duration with both holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (TFL).

METHODS

A multicenter prospective study was conducted from January 2020 to April 2023. Patients with kidney or ureteral stones confirmed at non-contrast computed tomography and treated by flexible ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy were enrolled. "Kidney Stone Calculator" provided stone volume and subsequent lithotripsy duration estimation using three-dimensional segmentation of the stone on computed tomography and the graphical user interface for laser settings. The primary endpoint was the quantitative and qualitative comparison between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations. Secondary endpoints included subgroup analysis (Ho:YAG-TFL) of differences between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations and intraoperative outcomes. Multivariate analysis assessed the association between pre- and intraoperative variables and these differences according to laser source.

RESULTS

89 patients were included in this study, 43 and 46 in Ho:YAG and TFL groups, respectively. No significant difference was found between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations (27.37 vs 28.36 min, p = 0.43) with a significant correlation (r =  + 0.89, p < 0.001). Among groups, this difference did not differ (p = 0.68 and 0.07, respectively), with a higher correlation between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations for TFL compared to Ho:YAG (r =  + 0.95, p < 0.001 vs r =  + 0.81, p < 0.001, respectively). At multivariate analysis, the difference was correlated with preoperative (volume > 2000 mm3 (Ho:YAG), 500-750 mm3 SV and calyceal diverticulum (TFL)), operative (fragmentation setting (p > 0.001), and basket utilization (p = 0.05) (Ho:YAG)) variables.

CONCLUSION

KSC is a reliable tool for predicting the lithotripsy duration estimation during flexible ureteroscopy for both Ho:YAG and TFL. However, some variables not including laser source may lead to underestimating this estimation.

Successful treatment by a chlorin e6 derivative mediated photodynamic therapy combined holmium laser for cervical and vaginal giant condyloma acuminata and low-grade intraepithelial neoplasia:A case report

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is proved effective for treating low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) and condylomata acuminata (CA). 5-Aminolevulinicacid (5-ALA) is the most common applied photosensitizer, but high rate of unbearable pain and relative long incubation time were reported. Here, we report a 27-year-old woman suffering from cervical and vaginal giant CA with LSIL involving the whole right vaginal fornix, cervical surface, and vaginal wall. Holmium yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho: YAG) laser was first applied to remove the giant CA lesions. STBF, a derivative of chlorin e6 (Ce6) was then applied on suspicious lesions as a new photosensitizer for 1 h. Lesions were exposed to LED illumination with a wavelength of 630 nm and light dose of 200-284 J/cm2 for cervical canal and the vaginal surfaces, 100-150 J/cm2 for cervix surface. Vaginal giant CA and LSIL lesions got complete remission at 6-month follow-up. Mild tolerable adverse reactions were observed after STBF-PDT and relieved in 24 h. Thus, the combination of Ho: YAG laser and STBF-PDT may be a novel option for cervical and vaginal giant CA and LSIL, especially for special vaginal fornix areas.

Getting hot in here! Comparison of Holmium vs. thulium laser in an anatomic hydrogel kidney model

As laser technology has advanced, high-power lasers have become increasingly common. The Holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser has long been accepted as the standard for laser lithotripsy. The thulium fiber laser (TFL) has recently been established as a viable option. The aim of this study is to evaluate thermal dose and temperature for the Ho:YAG laser to the TFL at four different laser settings while varying energy, frequency, operator duty cycle (ODC). Utilizing high-fidelity, 3D-printed hydrogel models of a pelvicalyceal collecting system (PCS) with a synthetic BegoStone implanted in the renal pelvis, laser lithotripsy was performed with the Ho:YAG laser or TFL. At a standard power (40W) and irrigation (17.9 ml/min), we evaluated four different laser settings with ODC variations with different time-on intervals. Temperature was measured at two separate locations. In general, the TFL yielded greater cumulative thermal doses than the Ho:YAG laser. Thermal dose and temperature were typically greater at the stone when compared away from the stone. Regarding the TFL, there was no general trend if fragmentation or dusting settings yielded greater thermal doses or temperatures. The TFL generated greater temperatures and thermal doses in general than the Ho:YAG laser with Moses technology. Temperatures and thermal doses were greater closer to the laser fiber tip. It is inconclusive as to whether fragmentation or dusting settings elicit greater thermal loads for the TFL. Energy, frequency, ODC, and laser-on time significantly impact thermal loads during ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy, independent of power.

Comparison of Thulium Fiber Laser versus Holmium laser in ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a Meta-analysis and systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser (TFL) to holmium: YAG (Ho: YAG) laser in ureteroscopic lithotripsy for urolithiasis.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CENTRAL, SinoMed, CNKI database, VIP and Wanfang Database were systematically searched for all relevant clinical trials until September 2023. References were explored to identify the relevant articles. Meta-analysis was carried out for the retrieved studies using RevMan5.4.1 software, and the risk ratio, mean difference and 95% confidence interval were expressed. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The main outcomes of this meta-analysis were stone-free rate (SFR), perioperative outcomes and intraoperative or postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, including 1394 patients, were included. According to the results of pooled analysis, TFL was associated with significantly higher stone-free rate (SFR) [0.52, 95% CI (0.32, 0.85), P = 0.009], shorter operation time [-5.47, 95% CI (-8.86, -2.08), P = 0.002], and less stone migration [0.17, 95% CI (0.06, 0.50), P = 0.001]. However, there was no significant difference in terms of the laser time, duration of hospital stay, drop of hemoglobin level, total energy, postoperative ureteral stenting, the incidence of intraoperative complications or postoperative complications between TFL and Ho: YAGs.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study demonstrated several advantages of TFL in terms of higher SFR, shorter operative time and less stone migration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol of this systematic review was listed in PROSPERO ( www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO ) (Protocol number: CRD42022362550).

Surgical Artificial Intelligence: Endourology

Endourology is ripe with information that includes patient factors, laboratory tests, outcomes, and visual data, which is becoming increasingly complex to assess. Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to explore and define these relationships; however, humans might not be involved in the input, analysis, or even determining the methods of analysis. Herein, the authors present the current state of AI in endourology and highlight the need for urologists to share their proposed AI solutions for reproducibility outside of their institutions and prepare themselves to properly critique this new technology.

Thulium fiber laser cystolithotripsy under local anesthesia: A day care procedure

INTRODUCTION

Bladder stones account for 5% of all urolithiasis. Patients present with LUTS or acute urinary retention. Thus, warranting an early intervention. Minimally invasive approach with laser lithotripsy is the present gold standard to treat bladder stones.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the outcomes of TFL (60 W) for bladder stones performed under local anesthesia as a day-care procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center study conducted after obtaining IRB approval. Study period was between June 2021 and June 2022 were included. All patients were operated under local anesthesia as a day care procedure. The procedure was carried out using an 18 Fr laser sheath and calculus dusted using TFL energy (15-30 W). Parameters including operative time in minutes, complications were recorded. Patients were encouraged oral and normal voiding in the immediate post-op period.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients with bladder stones presented during this period. Of these, 30 underwent laser lithotripsy (TFL) for bladder calculi. The clinical presentation of patients was LUTS in 28 (93%) and 5 (16%) patients had AUR. The average size of the stone in this series was 15 ± 2.8 mm. The mean duration of laser lithotripsy was 15 ± 5.4 min. Energy to dust the stone was variable with mean LASER energy of 18.23 ± 10 W. All patients tolerated the procedure well and none required conversion to conventional anesthesia. One patient failed to void in the post-op period. 100% clearance rate was documented in all patients.

CONCLUSION

Thulium fiber laser for transurethral cystolithotripsy of bladder stones under local anesthesia is a feasible technique with minimal morbidity and good outcome.

Exploring optimal settings for safe and effective thulium fibre laser lithotripsy in a kidney model

OBJECTIVES

To explore the optimal laser settings and treatment strategies for thulium fibre laser (TFL) lithotripsy, namely, those with the highest treatment efficiency, lowest thermal injury risk, and shortest procedure time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An in vitro kidney model was used to assess the efficacy of TFL lithotripsy in the upper calyx. Stone ablation experiments were performed on BegoStone phantoms at different combinations of pulse energy (EP ) and frequency (F) to determine the optimal settings. Temperature changes and thermal injury risks were monitored using embedded thermocouples. Experiments were also performed on calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM) stones to validate the optimal settings.

RESULTS

High EP /low F settings demonstrated superior treatment efficiency compared to low EP /high F settings using the same power. Specifically, 0.8 J/12 Hz was the optimal setting, resulting in a twofold increase in treatment efficiency, a 39% reduction in energy expenditure per unit of ablated stone mass, a 35% reduction in residual fragments, and a 36% reduction in total procedure time compared to the 0.2 J/50 Hz setting for COM stones. Thermal injury risk assessment indicated that 10 W power settings with high EP /low F combinations remained below the threshold for tissue injury, while higher power settings (>10 W) consistently exceeded the safety threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that high EP /low F settings, such as 0.8 J/12 Hz, are optimal for TFL lithotripsy in the treatment of COM stones. These settings demonstrated significantly improved treatment efficiency with reduced residual fragments compared to conventional settings while keeping the thermal dose below the injury threshold. This study highlights the importance of using the high EP /low F combination with low power settings, which maximizes treatment efficiency and minimizes potential thermal injury. Further studies are warranted to determine the optimal settings for TFL for treating kidney stones with different compositions.

The Saudi urological association guidelines on urolithiasis

Aims

The Saudi Urolithiasis Guidelines are a set of recommendations for diagnosing, evaluating, and treating urolithiasis in the Saudi population. These guidelines are based on the latest evidence and expert consensus to improve patient outcomes and optimize care delivery. They cover the various aspects of urolithiasis, including risk factors, diagnosis, medical and surgical treatments, and prevention strategies. By following these guidelines, health-care professionals can improve care quality for individuals with urolithiasis in Saudi Arabia.

Panel

The Saudi Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel consists of urologists specialized in endourology with expertise in urolithiasis and consultation with a guideline methodologist. All panelists involved in this document have submitted statements disclosing any potential conflicts of interest.

Methods

The Saudi Guidelines on Urolithiasis were developed by relying primarily on established international guidelines to adopt or adapt the most appropriate guidance for the Saudi context. When necessary, the panel modified the phrasing of recommendations from different sources to ensure consistency within the document. To address areas less well covered in existing guidelines, the panel conducted a directed literature search for high quality evidence published in English, including meta analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective nonrandomized comparative studies. The panel also searched for locally relevant studies containing information unique to the Saudi Arabian population. The recommendations are formulated with a direction and strength of recommendation based on GRADE terminology and interpretation while relying on existing summaries of evidence from the existing guidelines.

The thermal effect of lasers in urology: a review article

Lasers as a technology have a leading role in the modern urological treatment armamentarium. In this article, the application of lasers in different areas of urology is described. The major uses are in urolithiasis, benign prostatic enlargement (BPE), and management of many urological malignancies and other benign pathologies. Lasers have become an established treatment modality in urolithiasis, an acceptable alternative with the least side effect profile in BPE patients, and a novel and promising therapy in many other fields of Urology.

Pulsed Thulium:YAG laser - What is the lithotripsy ablation efficiency for stone dust from human urinary stones? Results from an in vitro PEARLS study

BACKGROUND

The novel pulsed thulium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (p-Tm:YAG) laser was recently introduced. Current studies present promising p-Tm:YAG ablation efficiency, although all are based on non-human stone models or with unknown stone composition. The present study aimed to evaluate p-Tm:YAG ablation efficiency for stone dust from human urinary stones of known compositions.

METHODS

Calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM) and uric acid (UA) stones were subjected to lithotripsy in vitro using a p-Tm:YAG laser generator (Thulio®, Dornier MedTech GmbH, Germany). 200 J was applied at 0.1 J × 100 Hz, 0.4 J × 25 Hz or 2.0 J × 5 Hz (average 10W). Ablated stone dust mass was calculated from weight difference between pre-lithotripsy stone and post-lithotripsy fragments > 250 µm. Estimated ablated volume was calculated using prior known stone densities (COM: 2.04 mg/mm3, UA: 1.55 mg/mm3).

RESULTS

Mean ablation mass efficiency was 0.04, 0.06, 0.07 mg/J (COM) and 0.04, 0.05, 0.06 mg/J (UA) for each laser setting, respectively. This translated to 0.021, 0.029, 0.034 mm3/J (COM) and 0.026, 0.030, 0.039 mm3/J (UA). Mean energy consumption was 26, 18, 17 J/mg (COM) and 32, 23, 17 J/mg (UA). This translated to 53, 37, 34 J/mm3 (COM) and 50, 36, 26 J/mm3 (UA). There were no statistically significant differences for laser settings or stone types (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study showing ablation efficiency of the p-Tm:YAG laser for stone dust from human urinary stones of known compositions. The p-Tm:YAG seems to ablate COM and UA equally well, with no statistically significant differences between differing laser settings.

Thulium:YAG laser: a good compromise between holmium:YAG and thulium fiber laser for endoscopic lithotripsy? A narrative review

PURPOSE

To provide a technological description of the new pulsed solid-state Thulium:YAG laser (Tm:YAG). In addition, current available literature on Tm:YAG lithotripsy is also reviewed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science databases were used to search for Tm:YAG operating mode articles.

RESULTS

Tm:YAG technology works with a laser cavity with thulium-doped YAG crystal, pumped by laser diodes. Laser beam operates at 2013 nm, with an adjustable peak power (≥ 1000 W) and the minimal fiber laser diameter is of 200 µm. It has an intermediate water absorption coefficient and peak power-pulse duration. Various pulse modulations are proposed, aiming to minimize stone retropulsion. Multiple comparative in vitro studies suggest that Tm:YAG's ability to fragment stones is similar to the one of the Ho:YAG laser; on the contrary, its ability to dust all stone types is similar to the one of the TFL, with a low retropulsion. A single in vivo study assessed Tm:YAG lithotripsy feasibility.

CONCLUSIONS

The new pulsed solid-state thulium:YAG laser could represent a safe and effective compromise between Ho:YAG laser and TFL for endoscopic lithotripsy, either in retrograde intra-renal surgeries or in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

What to expect from the novel pulsed thulium:YAG laser? A systematic review of endourological applications

INTRODUCTION

Several preclinical studies about a novel pulsed-thulium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (p-Tm:YAG) device have been published, demonstrating its possible clinical relevance.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the reality and expectations for this new p-Tm:YAG technology. A PubMed, Scopus and Embase search were performed. All relevant studies and data identified in the bibliographic search were selected, categorized, and summarized.

RESULTS

Tm:YAG is a solid state diode-pumped laser that emits at a wavelength of 2013 nm, in the infrared spectrum. Despite being close to the Ho:YAG emission wavelength (2120 nm), Tm:YAG is much closer to the water absorption peak and has higher absorption coefficient in liquid water. At present, there very few evaluations of the commercially available p-Tm:YAG devices. There is a lack of information on how the technical aspects, functionality and pulse mechanism can be maximized for clinical utility. Available preclinical studies suggest that p-Tm:YAG laser may potentially increase the ablated stone weight as compared to Ho:YAG under specific condition and similar laser parameters, showing lower retropulsion as well. Regarding laser safety, a preclinical study observed similar absolute temperature and cumulative equivalent minutes at 43° C as compared to Ho:YAG. Finally, laser-associated soft-tissue damage was assessed at histological level, showing similar extent of alterations due to coagulation and necrosis when compared with the other clinically relevant lasers.

CONCLUSIONS

The p-Tm:YAG appears to be a potential alternative to the Ho:YAG and TFL according to these preliminary laboratory data. Due to its novelty, further studies are needed to broaden our understanding of its functioning and clinical applicability.

2022 Recommendations of the AFU Lithiasis Committee: Laser - utilization and settings

Endocorporeal lithotripsy has progressed thanks to the development of lasers. Two laser sources are currently available: Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and more recently Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL). The settings generally used are dusting, fragmentation, and "pop-corning". These are the first recommendations on laser use for stone management and their settings. Settings must be modulated and can be changed during the treatment according to the expected and obtained effects, the location and stone type that is treated. METHODOLOGY: These recommendations have been developed using two methods: the Clinical Practice Recommendation (CPR) method and the ADAPTE method, depending on whether or not the question was considered in the European Association of Urology (EAU) recommendations (https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis [EAU Guidelines on urolithiasis. 2022]) and their adaptability to the French context.

Vacuum-assisted dedusting lithotripsy in the treatment of kidney and proximal ureteral stones less than 3 cm in size

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the outcomes of vacuum-assisted dedusting lithotripsy (VADL) using flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath (FV-UAS) versus traditional flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (fURL) in patients with kidney or proximal ureteral calculi less than 3 cm in size.

METHODS

A total of 371 patients who successfully underwent fURL treatment were enrolled. These patients were divided into traditional fURL group and VADL group. Outcomes of both groups were compared using 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis. Stratified analyses based on stone size and location were also conducted.

RESULTS

Finally, 103 well-matched patients in each group were identified. No septic shock or death occurred. The immediate stone-free rate (SFR) and follow-up SFR of VADL group were significantly higher (78.6% vs. 50.5%, p < 0.001; 94.2%% vs. 75.7%, p < 0.001). No difference was observed in postoperative fever rate (2.9% vs. 3.9%, p = 1.000) and duration of lithotripsy (37.7 ± 20.1 min vs. 40.3 ± 18.9 min, p = 0.235). For patients with stones ≤ 2 cm in size, the immediate SFR and follow-up SFR in VADL group were higher (86.7% vs. 60.6%, p < 0.001; 96.0% vs. 83.1%, p = 0.010). The same trend was observed in the 2-3 cm subgroup (57.1% vs. 28.1%, p = 0.023; 89.3% vs. 59.4%, p = 0.009). Although the in situ fragmentation strategy was employed more frequently in VADL group for lower pole stones, the SFR was still higher. Subgroup analyses did not reveal any significant differences in either infectious complications or duration of lithotripsy.

CONCLUSION

VADL technique can significantly improve the postoperative SFR for the patients with kidney or proximal ureteral stones less than 3 cm in size treated by flexible ureteroscope.

Flexible ureteroscopy for lower pole calculus: is it still a challenge?

PURPOSE

Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) is steadily gaining popularity in the management of renal calculi, including those located in the lower pole (LP). Due to difficulty in accessing to the LP of kidney in minority of cases with fURS and reports of lower stone-free rate (SFR), it is still considered as a challenge in selected cases. The purpose of the review was to analyze the various aspects of fURS for LP stones.

METHODS

An extensive review of the recent literature was done including different factors such as anatomy, preoperative stenting, stone size, flexible scopes, types of lasers, laser fibers, suction, relocation, stone-free rates, and complications.

RESULTS

The significance of various lower pole anatomical measurements remain a subject of debate and requires standardization. Recent improvements in fURS such as single-use digital scopes with better vision and flexibility, high power laser, thulium fiber laser, smaller laser fiber, and accessories have significantly contributed to make flexible ureteroscopy  more effective and safer in the management of LP stone. The utilization of thulium fiber lasers in conjunction with various suction devices is being recognized and can significantly improve SFR.

CONCLUSIONS

With the significant advancement of various aspects of fURS, this treatment modality has shown remarkable efficacy and gaining widespread acceptance in management of LP kidney stones. These developments have made the fURS of LP stones less challenging.

Femtosecond laser lithotripsy: a novel alternative for kidney stone treatment? Evaluating the safety and effectiveness in an ex vivo study

The Holmium (Ho:YAG) laser is presently the most extensively employed in laser lithotripsy for the management of kidney stones. Despite its adoption as the gold standard for laser lithotripsy, Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy poses three significant challenges, namely thermal effect, insufficient stone fragmentation, and stone displacement, which have garnered increased attention from urologic surgeons. Nowadays, the femtosecond laser is regarded as a potential alternative to the Ho:YAG laser due to its capacity to ablate diverse materials with minimal thermal effect. In our ex vivo investigation, we assessed the dimensions of ablation pits, the efficacy of ablation, the degree of stone fragmentation, the alterations in water temperature surrounding stones, and the degree of tissue damage associated with Femtosecond laser lithotripsy utilizing adjustable power settings (1-50 W). Our findings indicate that the ablation pits generated by the Femtosecond laser exhibited uniform geometries, and the effectiveness of ablation and fragmentation for Femtosecond laser lithotripsy were significantly and positively correlated with laser power. When the laser power remained constant, the Femtosecond laser with higher pulse energy demonstrated superior efficiency in stone ablation, but inferior performance in stone fragmentation. Conversely, the Femtosecond laser with higher pulse frequency exhibited the opposite behavior. Furthermore, the thermal effect increased proportionally with laser power, leading to a tentative recommendation of 10W laser power for future investigations. Our in vitro findings suggest that the Femtosecond laser holds promise as a safe and effective alternative to holmium lasers.

Navigating urolithiasis treatment: assessing the practicality and performance of thulium fiber laser, holmium YAG, and thulium YAG in real-world scenarios

BACKGROUND

The management of urolithiasis has undergone significant advancements with the introduction of pulsed lasers, particularly the holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser, which is currently considered the gold standard in endourology. However, the Ho:YAG laser has certain limitations, such as the inability to support small laser fibers (150 μm) and the requirement of a heavy water cooling system, making it challenging to transfer between operating rooms. These limitations have led to the emergence of new laser technologies, including the thulium fiber laser (TFL) and the thulium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser (Tm:YAG), as potential alternatives to the Ho:YAG laser.

METHODS

In this review, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of TFL, Ho:YAG, and Tm:YAG lasers in real-life scenarios by comparing clinical trial data with laboratory findings. A literature review was conducted, and relevant in vitro studies and clinical trials until March 2023 were analyzed.

RESULTS

The findings indicate that TFL has demonstrated high ablation efficiency for stones of any composition, size, and location, superior the capabilities of Ho:YAG lasers. TFL has shown superior dusting and fragmentation abilities, lower retropulsion, and increased patient safety. The laser parameters, such as ablation efficiency, speed, operative time, dust quality, retropulsion, visibility, temperature safety, and stone-free rate, were compared between laboratory studies and clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Although the number of studies on TFL is limited, the available evidence suggests that TFL represents a significant advancement in laser technology for lithotripsy. However, further research is needed to fully explore the implications and limitations of TFL and Tm:YAG lasers.

Pulsed thulium:YAG laser-ready to dust all urinary stone composition types? Results from a PEARLS analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether stone dust can be obtained from all prevailing stone composition types using the novel pulsed thulium:YAG (p-Tm:YAG), including analysis of stone particle size after lithotripsy.

METHODS

Human urinary stones of 7 different compositions were subjected to in vitro lithotripsy using a p-Tm:YAG laser with 270 µm silica core fibers (Thulio®, Dornier MedTech GmbH®, Wessling, Germany). A cumulative energy of 1000 J was applied to each stone using one of three laser settings: 0.1 J × 100 Hz, 0.4 J × 25 Hz and 2.0 J × 5 Hz (average power 10 W). After lithotripsy, larger remnant fragments were separated from stone dust using a previously described method depending on the floating ability of dust particles. Fragments and dust samples were then passed through laboratory sieves to evaluate stone particle count according to a semiquantitative analysis relying on a previous definition of stone dust (i.e., stone particles ≤ 250 µm).

RESULTS

The p-Tm:YAG laser was able to produce stone dust from lithotripsy up to measured smallest mesh size of 63 µm in all seven stone composition types. Notably, all dust samples from all seven stone types and with all three laser settings had high counts of particles in the size range agreeing with the definition stone dust, i.e., ≤ 250 µm.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study in the literature proving the p-Tm:YAG laser capable of dusting all prevailing human urinary stone compositions, with production of dust particles ≤ 250 µm. These findings are pivotal for the broader future implementation of the p-Tm:YAG in clinical routine.

Controversies in ureteroscopy: lasers, scopes, ureteral access sheaths, practice patterns and beyond

Ureteroscopy has become an increasingly popular surgical intervention for conditions such as urinary stone disease. As new technologies and techniques become available, debate regarding their proper use has risen. This includes the role of single use ureteroscopes, optimal laser for stone lithotripsy, basketing versus dusting, the impact of ureteral access sheath, the need for safety guidewire, fluoroscopy free URS, imaging and follow up practices are all areas which have generated a lot of debate. This review serves to evaluate each of these issues and provide a balanced conclusion to guide the clinician in their practice.

Could Testicular Tissue Be a New Arena for the Holmium Laser?

Introduction We aimed to observe the effects of holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser on testicular tissue. Methods An ex vivo experiment was conducted using calf testicles. A 100 W laser generator with broad-spectrum settings of 10-80 W, 20-40 Hz, and 0.5-2 J, with a medium pulse duration, was tested. The laser effects on testicular tissues with and without the tunica layer were evaluated histopathologically by calculating the incision depth (ID), vaporization area (VA), coagulation area (CA), and total laser area (TLA=VA+CA) of the specimens. Results A total of 48 experiments were conducted. In testicular tissue without a tunica layer, the highest mean ID was determined at 1 J-20 Hz (0.247±0.0208 mm) and with a tunica layer at 2 J-40 Hz (2.673±0.032 mm). In the testicular tissue without a tunica layer, the highest mean VA was determined at 1.5 J-40 Hz (0.029±0.0016 mm2) and in tissue with a tunica at 2 J-40 Hz (6.173±0.114 mm2). The highest mean TLA in tissue without a tunica was detected at 2 J-20 Hz (0.038±0.0008 mm2) and in tissue with a tunica at 2 J-40 Hz (7.292±0.07 mm2). The mean ID, VA, CA, and TLA values of all the power outputs used were found to be statistically significantly higher in the testicular tissue with the tunica layer than in that without it (p<0.001). Conclusion The Ho:YAG laser has different effects on testicular tissue with and without a tunica layer. In testicular tissue without a tunica, the laser's effect was minimal on the surrounding tissue, especially in terms of the ID, VA, and TLA. This minimal effect of the laser can be an advantage in testicular surgery procedures such as testis-sparing surgery (TSS) or testicular sperm extraction (TESE).

Semirigid vs Flexible Ureteroscopy in the Management of Ureteral Stones - Review

Ureteral stones are a major clinical problem in urology that require effective and safe therapeutic options. Semirigid and flexible ureteroscopy ar two well-established procedures for treating these stones. The present review provides an outline of the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches. Semirigid ureteroscopy, which uses a rigid straight instrument, provides excellent stone visualisation and successful fragmentation. It is especially useful for proximal and bigger stones, frequently resulting in high stone-free rates and reduced procedure times. Nonetheless, its stiffness can make it difficult to navigate the delicate ureteral anatomy and increase the risk of mucosal injury. On the other hand, flexible ureteroscopy employs a more adjustable flexible scope, allowing access to complicated ureteral configurations while reducing the risk of ureteral trauma. It excels at treating distal and difficult stones but has a lower efficacy with larger stones and often requires longer procedure times. The choice between semirigid and flexible ureteroscopy is determined by patient-specific factors such as stone characteristics or anatomical considerations and the surgeon's skill. A customised approach that uses the capabilities of both treatments as needed can improve stone management outcomes while reducing potential problems. The continued advancement of technology and methodological modifications is predicted to improve the field of ureteroscopic stone management.

New Technologies in Endourology and Laser Lithotripsy: The Need for Evidence in Comprehensive Clinical Settings

Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) with laser lithotripsy is currently the gold standard surgical treatment for ureteral and kidney stones with a maximum diameter of 2 cm [...].

In Pursuit of the Optimal Dusting Settings with the Thulium Fiber Laser: An In Vitro Assessment

Objective: Low energy and high frequency settings are used in stone dusting for holmium lasers. Such settings may not be optimal for thulium fiber laser (TFL). With the seemingly endless combination of settings, we aim to provide guidance to the practicing urologists and assess the efficiency of the TFL platform in an automated in vitro "dusting model." Materials/Methods: Three experimental setups were designed to investigate stone dusting produced by an IPG Photonics TLR-50 W TFL system using 200 μm fiber and soft BegoStone phantoms. The most popular 10 and 20 W dusting settings among endourologist familiar with TFL were evaluated. We directly compared short pulse (SP) vs long pulse (LP) mode using various combinations of pulse energy (Ep) and pulse frequency (F). Thereafter, we tested the 10 and 20 W settings and compared them among each other to elucidate the most efficient settings at each power. Treatments were performed under the same total laser energy delivered to the stone at four different standoff distances (SDs) with a clinically relevant scanning speed of either 1 or 2 mm/sec. Ablation volumes were quantified by optical coherence tomography to assess stone dusting efficiency. Fragment size after ablation at different pulse energies was evaluated by sieving and evaluating under a microscope after treatment. Results: Overall, SP provided greater ablation volume when compared with LP. Our dusting efficiency model demonstrated that the maximum stone ablation was achieved at the combination of high energy/low frequency settings (p < 0.005) and at a SD of 0.2 mm. At all tested pulse energies, no stone phantoms were broken into fragments >1 mm. Conclusions: During stone dusting with TFL, SP offers superior ablation to LP settings. Optimal dusting at clinically relevant scanning speeds of 1 and 2 mm/sec occurs at high energy/low frequency settings. Thulium lithotripsy with high Ep does not result in increased fragment size.

Learning from the past and present to change the future: Endoscopic management of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma

Current guidelines recommend endoscopic management (EM) for patients with low-risk upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma, as well as those with an imperative indication. However, regardless of the tumor risk, radical nephroureterectomy is still mainly performed worldwide despite the benefits of EM, such as renal function maintenance, no hemodialysis requirement, and treatment cost reduction. This might be explained by the association of EM with a high risk of local recurrence and progression. Furthermore, the need for rigorous patient selection and close surveillance following EM may be relevant. Nevertheless, recent developments in diagnostic modalities, pathological evaluation, surgical devices and techniques, and intracavitary regimens have been reported, which may contribute to improved risk stratification and treatments with superior oncological outcomes. In this review, considering recent advances in endourology and oncology, we propose novel treatment strategies for optimal EM.

Initial clinical experience with the pulsed solid-state thulium YAG laser from Dornier during RIRS: first 25 cases

INTRODUCTION

Holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber (TFL) lasers are currently the two laser sources recommended for endocorporeal laser lithotripsy (ELL). Recently, the pulsed-thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG) laser was also proposed for ELL, as an answer to both Ho:YAG and TFL limitations. We aimed to evaluate the efficiency, safety, and laser settings of Tm:YAG laser in ELL during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).

METHODS

A prospective study of the first 25 patients with ureteral and renal stones who underwent RIRS using the Thulio (pulsed-Tm:YAG, Dornier©, Germany) was performed in a single center. 272 µm laser fibers were used. Stone size, stone density, laser-on time (LOT) and laser settings were recorded. We also assessed the ablation speed (mm3/s), Joules/mm3 and laser power (W) values for each procedure. Postoperative results, such as stone-free rate (SFR) and zero fragments rate (ZFR) were also recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 25 patients were analyzed (Table 1). The median (IQR) age was 55 (44-72) years old. Median (IQR) stone volume was 2849 (916-9153)mm3. Median (IQR) stone density was 1000 (600-1174)HU. Median (IQR) pulse energy, pulse rate and total power were 0.6 (0.6-0,8)J, 15(15-20)Hz and 12(9-16)W, respectively. All procedures used "Captive Fragmenting" pulse modulation (Table 2). The median (IQR) J/mm3 was 14,8 (6-21). The median (IQR) ablation rate was 0,75 (0,46-2)mm3/s. One postoperative complications occurred (streinstrasse). SFR and ZFR were 95% and 55%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The pulsed-Tm:YAG laser is a safe and effective laser source for lithotripsy during RIRS, using low pulse energy and low pulse frequency.

Pulsed-wave vs Continuous-wave Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuFLEP): A Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To compare intra and early postoperative outcomes between pulsed-wave and continuous-wave Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (PW-ThuFLEP vs CW-ThuFLEP) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

METHODS

238 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms due to benign prostatic hyperplasia underwent PW-ThuFLEP (118 patients) vs CW-ThuFLEP (120 patients). Preoperative prostate volume, adenoma volume, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and hemoglobin values were recorded. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), maximum flow rate (Qmax), post-void residual volume, and International Index of Erectile Function-5 score (IIEF-5) were assessed. Operative time, enucleation time, enucleation efficiency, catheterization time, irrigation volume, hospital stay, hemoglobin drop, and postoperative complications were recorded. Micturition improvements and sexual outcomes were evaluated 3months after surgery.

RESULTS

CW-ThuFLEP showed shorter operative time (61.5 vs 67.4 minutes, P = .04). Enucleation time (50.2 vs 53.3 minutes, P = .12), enucleation efficiency (0.8 vs 0.7 g/min, P = .38), catheterization time (2.2 vs 2.1days, P = .29), irrigation volume (32.9 vs 32.8L, P = .71), hospital stay (2.8 vs 2.6days, P = .29) and hemoglobin drop (0.38 vs 0.39 g/dL, P = .53) were comparable. No significant difference in complication rate was observed. At 3-month follow-up, the procedures did not show any significant difference in IPSS, Qmax, post-void residual volume, IIEF-5, and PSA value.

CONCLUSION

PW-ThuFLEP and CW-ThuFLEP both relieve lower urinary tract symptoms equally, with high efficacy and safety. Operative time was significantly shorter with CW-ThuFLEP, but with a small difference with low clinical impact. Enucleation time, enucleation efficiency, catheterization time, irrigation volume, hospital stay, hemoglobin and PSA drop, complication rate, and sexual outcomes showed no differences.

Endoscopic Conservative Treatment of Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma with a Thulium Laser: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Thulium lasers (TLs), namely the Thulium fiber laser (TFL) and the Thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG), are being increasingly adopted for the conservative treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). However, to date, the real clinical impact of TLs on UTUC management remains not well-characterized. We performed a review of the literature to summarize the current evidence on TLs for UTUC treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review in January 2023 using the Embase and Medline online databases, according to the PRISMA recommendations and using the PICO criteria. Outcomes of interest were: (i) to assess the safety and feasibility of TLs in the treatment of UTUC, and (ii) to evaluate the oncological outcomes in terms of tumor recurrence and conservative treatment failure. Moreover, we described TL characteristics and its interaction with soft tissue.

RESULTS

a total of 458 articles were screened, and six full texts including 273 patients were identified. All the included studies were retrospective series. Mean patient age ranged from 66 to 73 years. The indication of a conservative treatment was elective and imperative in 21.7-85% and 15-76% of cases, respectively. Laser power settings varied from 5 to 50 W. No intraoperative complications were reported, and all the procedures were successfully performed. The tumor recurrence rate was 17.7-44%, and the indication to radical nephroureterectomy was 3.7-44% during a follow-up of 6-50 months. Most of the postoperative complications were mild and transient, and ureteral strictures were reported in two studies. Major limitations were the retrospective nature of the studies, the small sample sizes, and the short follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

TL is an effective and safe technology for endoscopic UTUC treatment. However, current available literature lacks prospective and multicentric studies with large population sizes and long-term follow-up.

Ureteroscopic lithotripsy by thulium fiber laser versus holmium laser: A single-center prospective randomized study

Objective

Laser lithotripsy has been the standard of care for lower and mid-ureteric calculi. Thulium fiber laser (TFL) is a new introduction to this field, which has been extensively studied for retrograde intrarenal surgery. We have done a prospective randomized study of ureteroscopic lithotripsy between TFL and holmium: Yttrium-aluminum-garnet (HO: YAG) laser to know the efficacy of stone fragmentation, stone-free rate, and complications.

Methodology

A prospective randomized study was done in our hospital from March 2021 to May 2022 on patients planned for ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy. Patients with distal and mid-ureteral stones from 4 mm to 15 mm were included. The laser was used to fragment the stone. All the stones were fragmented from the center to periphery. The setting used was up to 10 W (6-10 Hz, 1J) for TFL and up to 10 W for HO: YAG (5-10 Hz, 0.5-1J). Once the stones were fragmented, they were retrieved until complete visual clearance. Demographic data and stone parameters such as stone size, volume, density, laterality, laser usage time, total operative time, and total energy used were recorded. Operative time, lasering time, retropulsion rate, ablation speed, and visibility score were recorded.

Results

Each group had 90 randomized patients. Both the groups had similar kinds of patient and stone profiles. The mean operating time was 18.5 ± 1.5 min (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.2-25.6) in the TFL group, which was shorter than the holmium group 31.6 ± 1.2 min (95% CI 18.4-38.5), and it was statistically significant (P = 0.024,). Lasering time was also statistically significant with less lasering time with TFL group 7.4 ± 1.8 min (95% CI 5.2-10.3) versus holmium group 14.8 ± 1.5 min (95% CI 12.3-18.4) (P = 0.011). Laser efficacy and ablation speed were better in the TFL group compared to the HO: YAG group and were statistically significant. The visual score was better in HO: YAG group compared to the TFL group.

Conclusion

TFL is more efficacious and faster than Holmium: Yag laser. Complications were similar between the groups. Stone-free rate was also similar between both the groups.

Comparing dusting and fragmenting efficiency using the new SuperPulsed thulium fiber laser versus a 120 W Holmium:YAG laser

PURPOSE

Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy requires high amperage power and has an upper limit of frequency and a minimal fiber size. The technology utilizing thulium-doped fiber offers low pulse energy settings and high pulse frequencies up to 2,400 Hz. We compared the novel SuperPulsed thulium fiber laser (SOLTIVE™; Olympus) to a commercially available 120 W Ho:YAG laser.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bench-top testing was conducted with 125 mm³ standardized BegoStones (Bego USA). Time to ablate the stone into particles <1 mm was recorded for efficiency calculations. Finite energy was delivered, and resulting particle sizes were measured to determine fragmentation (0.5 kJ) and dusting (2 kJ) efficiencies. Remaining mass or number of fragments were measured to compare efficacy.

RESULTS

SOLTIVE™ was faster at ablating stones to particles <1 mm (2.23±0.22 mg/s, 0.6 J 30 Hz short pulse) compared to Ho:YAG laser (1.78±0.44 mg/s, 0.8 J 10 Hz short pulse) (p<0.001). Following 0.5 kJ of energy in fragmentation testing, fewer particles >2 mm remained using SOLTIVE™ than Ho:YAG laser (2.10 vs. 7.20 fragments). After delivering 2 kJ, dusting (1.05±0.08 mg/s) was faster using SOLTIVE™ (0.1 J 200 Hz short pulse) than 120 W 0.46±0.09 mg/s (0.3 J 70 Hz Moses) (p=0.005). SOLTIVE™ (0.1 J 200 Hz) produced more dust particles <0.5 mm (40%) compared to 24% produced by the P120 W laser at 0.3 J 70 Hz Moses and 14% at 0.3 J 70 Hz long pulse (p=0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of SOLTIVE™ is superior to the 120 W Ho:YAG laser by producing smaller dust particles and fewer fragments. Further studies are warranted.

Incidence of Ureteric strictures Following Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy: Holmium:YAG Versus Thulium Fiber Laser

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the incidence of ureteric strictures between holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet and thulium fiber laser following ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy. In the present era of miniaturization of endourologic armamentarium and better optics, how safe are lasers to fire inside ureter?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

It is a prospective comparative study over a period of 2 years that included patients who underwent ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy for ureteric stones. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: group A underwent holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser lithotripsy and group B underwent thulium fiber laser lithotripsy.

RESULTS

A total of 478 patients were analyzed after excluding patients not willing to participate and patients lost to follow-up. Two hundred forty patients underwent holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser lithotripsy (group A) and 238 patients underwent thulium fiber laser lithotripsy (group B). The demographic data of 2 groups were comparable. The mean age of patients in group A and group B was 36.5 ± 12.52 years and 38.62 ± 10.71 years, respectively. The mean operative time in group A and group B was 47 ± 15 and 36 ± 13 minutes, respectively, while the mean laser time in group A and group B was 13.5 ± 45 minutes and 9.25 ± 3.2 minutes, respectively. Four (1.67%) patients in group A and 11 (4.62%) patients in group B developed ureteric strictures during follow-up, and the difference was statistically significant (P <.001). The mean length of stricture was 2.67 ± 1.27 cm in group A and 4.42 ± 2.2 cm in group B, and the difference was statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Thulium fiber laser, projected as safe laser previously, has a higher incidence of ureteric strictures compared to holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser when used for ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy.

Innovations in endourologic stone surgery: contemporary practice patterns from a global survey

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the current availability of technology for urolithiasis treatment and ureteroscopy. Perioperative practice patterns, availability of ureteroscopic technologies, pre- and post-stenting practices, and methods to alleviate stent-related symptoms were assessed via a survey of members of the Endourological Society. Methods We distributed a 43-question survey online via the Qualtrics platform to members of the Endourological Society. The survey consisted of questions pertaining to the following topics: general (6), equipment (17), preoperative ureteroscopy (URS; 9), intraoperative URS (2), and postoperative URS (9). Results A total of 191 urologists responded to the survey. 51% of urologists were fellowship trained and dedicated an average of 58% of their practice to stone management. In terms of procedures, most urologists performed ureteroscopy most commonly (68%), followed by percutaneous nephrolithotomy (23%) and shockwave lithotripsy (11%). 90% of respondent urologists purchased a new ureteroscope within the last five years (16% single-use scopes, 53% reusable, and 31% purchased both). 57% of the respondents stated that they would be interested in a ureteroscope that can sense intrarenal pressure, with an additional 30% stating they would be interested depending on the cost. 80% of responders purchased a new laser within the last five years, and 59% changed their lasering technique due to the new laser. 70% are performing primary ureteroscopy for obstructing stones, and 30% prefer pre-stenting patients for subsequent URS (on average after 21 days). 59% of responders insert a ureteral stent after URS, which is removed, on average, after eight days in uncomplicated cases and 21 days after complicated URS. Most urologists give analgesics, alpha-blockers, and anticholinergics for stent-related symptoms and less than 10% prescribe opioids. Conclusion Our survey revealed urologists' eagerness for the early adoption of novel technologies and adherence to conservative practice patterns focused on patient safety.

Thulium fibre laser vs holmium: yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy for urolithiasis: meta-analysis of clinical studies

OBJECTIVE

To compare and assess the clinical outcomes between thulium fibre laser (TFL) and holmium: yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser endoscopic lithotripsy of urolithiasis through a meta-analysis of comparative clinical studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in May 2022, grey literature search in July 2022. Comparative clinical studies were evaluated according to Cochrane recommendations. Assessed outcomes include the stone-free rate (SFR), complication rate, operative time (OT), laser utilisation time (LUT), ablation rate (stone volume/laser time), ablation efficiency (energy use/stone volume), total energy usage, degree of retropulsion, and hospital stay. Risk ratios (RRs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) were extrapolated. Subgroup analyses, heterogeneity, publication bias, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment were performed. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) registration: CRD42022300788.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies with 1698 cases were included in this review. The outcome of SFR showed no significant between-group difference (RR 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99-1.20). However, subgroup analysis of TFL vs Ho:YAG with no pulse modulation showed a SFR favouring TFL (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.23). The composite postoperative complication rate was comparable between the two intervention groups (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.66-1.43). OT, LUT and ablation rate were significantly better for TFL than Ho:YAG (SMD -1.19, 95% CI -1.85 to -0.52; SMD -1.67, 95% CI -2.62 to -0.72; SMD 0.59, 95% CI 0.15-1.03; respectively). The degree of retropulsion was significantly lower for TFL than Ho:YAG without pulse modulation (SMD -1.23, 95% CI -1.74 to -0.71). Ablation efficiency, total energy usage, and hospital stay were all comparable. Based on GRADE criteria, the evidence certainty was determined to be very low.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there was no between-group difference for the SFR. However, compared to Ho:YAG with no pulse modulation, TFL rendered a better SFR. Shorter OT and LUT, a lesser degree of retropulsion, and a better ablation rate were noted in favour of the TFL. There was no overall between-group difference for composite postoperative complication rate, ablation efficiency, total energy usage, and hospital stay. Currently, the available clinical evidence was assessed to be of very low certainty.

Thulium fiber laser in endourology: current clinical evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review and summarize preclinical and clinical data on thulium fiber laser's (TFL) effectiveness (ablation rate, stone-free rate etc.) and safety in terms of laser injuries and thermal damage. This enables us to assess how the in-vitro evidence translates into the clinical real-life scenario.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this analysis, a total of 21 preclinical trials have been included. Most of the trials use conventional Holmium:YAG laser as a comparator, with only a few assessing lasers with pulse modulation. Most of the trials focus on the superior ablation rate and superior dusting features of TFL, as well as comparison of retropulsion (both in conventional Ho:YAG and in a pulse modulation), with a few studies assessing safety aspects. A total of 13 trials assessed TFL, clinically, in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). The clinical data obtained suggest that lithotripsy by TFL is safe, facilitates effective stone fragmentation, and results in a reduction of retropulsion. Unfortunately, most of the clinical trials lack a direct comparator, and so no clear-cut comparisons are possible.

SUMMARY

During in-vitro studies, TFL demonstrated to be a new energy source with a great potential for improved ablation, lower retropulsion and improved dusting. These claims are supported in contemporary clinical studies, reporting superior ablation and negligible retropulsion in both PCNL and RIRS. However, it should be noted that the data regarding clinical results compared with conventional Ho:YAG is still limited.

Unfavorable factors in accessing the pelvicalyceal system during retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (fURS)

Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) is a well-established procedure for treating multiple upper-urinary tract pathologies, particularly renoureteral lithiasis. Endoscopes have undergone significant advancements, including miniaturization, improved optics, and increased maneuverability. In addition, advancements in accessory instruments, such as the performance of laser fibers, guidewires, and extraction probes, have played a significant role in improving the overall performance of flexible ureteroscopy procedures. However, despite these advancements, unique circumstances can make achieving optimum results during flexible ureteroscopy challenging. These include congenital renal anomalies (horseshoe kidneys, ectopic kidneys, rotation anomalies), as well as the unique intrarenal anatomy (infundibulopelvic angle, infundibular length) or the specifications of the endoscope in terms of maneuverability (active and passive deflection). This review explored challenging scenarios during flexible ureteroscopy procedures in the pyelocaliceal system.

Current laser therapy options for endoscopic treatment of upper tract urothelial carcinoma

Endoscopic management via retrograde ureteroscopic laser ablation of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) has become the preferred treatment modality for low-risk tumors. The most popular ablative lasers over the past 15-20 years have been the holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) and neodymium (Nd:YAG) lasers, but recently the thulium (Th:YAG) laser has emerged as a potential alternative. This review compares the mechanism of action, physiological properties and effects, and oncologic outcomes of Ho:YAG/Nd:YAG lasers versus the Th:YAG laser for UTUC treatment. Potential advantages of the Th:YAG laser over existing technologies are outlined, followed by a discussion of emerging laser technologies in UTUC management.

Ureteroscopy and Shock Wave Lithotripsy Trends from 2012 to 2019 Within the US Medicare Dataset: Sharp Growth in Ureteroscopy Utilization

Introduction and Objective: Both ureteroscopy (URS) and shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) are cornerstones in the surgical management of urolithiasis in the United States. We hypothesized that URS utilization outpaced SWL utilization in recent years and quantified the magnitude of change over time for caseloads of URS and SWL among urologists from a national Medicare database. Methods: Using the public "Medicare Physician & Other Practitioners" database (https://data.cms.gov), we determined case numbers of SWL (current procedural terminology [CPT] 50590) and URS (CPT 52356 or 52353) from 2012 to 2019. In a subanalysis, we identified "high-volume stone urologists" as those in the upper quartile of case numbers for both SWL and URS in baseline years of either 2012 or 2013 and trended their caseload from 2012 to 2019. Linear estimation models assessed annual rates of change and their statistical significance. Results: In 2012, urologists performed 41,135 SWL procedures vs 21,184 URS. URS overtook SWL in 2017 and by 2019 was the dominant modality (60,063 URS vs 43,635 SWL). Between 2012 and 2019, total URS cases annually increased by 5700 (15%/year, p < 0.001), while the number of SWL cases peaked in 2015 and has since declined on average -1.6%/year (p = 0.020). The number of urologists performing URS steadily rose from 1147 in 2012 to 2809 in 2019, reflecting an additional 246 urologists (21%/year) performing URS annually. The caseload of high-volume stone urologists showed similar trends with average URS cases increasing by 2.9/year/urologist (9.8%/year, p < 0.001) and average SWL cases declining by 0.9/year/urologist (-1.7%/year, p = 0.023). Conclusions: URS utilization has increased dramatically and outpaced SWL utilization from 2012 to 2019 within the Medicare population. URS was increasingly used by both the general urologist population and high-volume stone urologists while SWL utilization has begun to decline.

Miniaturization in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: What is new?

Objective

To summarize recent advancements in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) in surgical technique, stone removal strategy, lithotripsy, and surgical model from the current literature.

Methods

We conducted a narrative review of relevant English-language articles up to October 2022 using the PubMed and Web of Science databases. The following keywords were used in the search: "percutaneous nephrolithotomy", "minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy", "mini-PCNL", "mini-perc", "mPCNL", and "miniaturization".

Results

A series of new progress has been made in many aspects of mini-PCNL, such as further reduction of tract size-needle perc and further improvement of robotic-assisted PCNL-artificial intelligence-powered robotic devices.

Conclusion

Many studies and trials have been conducted to reduce morbidity and increase the safety and effectiveness of mini-PCNL. It is crucial to realize that miniaturization of PCNL requires not only a smaller percutaneous tract size, but also an adjustment strategically in renal access, stone removal, lithotripsy, and surgical model in general. More large-scale prospective research needs to be carried out to further validate and optimize the safety and effectiveness of mini-PCNL.

International Alliance of Urolithiasis guideline on retrograde intrarenal surgery

OBJECTIVES

To set out the second in a series of guidelines on the treatment of urolithiasis by the International Alliance of Urolithiasis that concerns retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), with the aim of providing a clinical framework for urologists performing RIRS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After a comprehensive search of RIRS-related literature published between 1 January 1964 and 1 October 2021 from the PubMed database, systematic review and assessment were performed to inform a series of recommendations, which were graded using modified GRADE methodology. Additionally, quality of evidence was classified using a modification of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence system. Finally, related comments were provided.

RESULTS

A total of 36 recommendations were developed and graded that covered the following topics: indications and contraindications; preoperative imaging; preoperative ureteric stenting; preoperative medications; peri-operative antibiotics; management of antithrombotic therapy; anaesthesia; patient positioning; equipment; lithotripsy; exit strategy; and complications.

CONCLUSION

The series of recommendations regarding RIRS, along with the related commentary and supporting documentation, offered here should help provide safe and effective performance of RIRS.

Understanding the ablation rate of Holmium:YAG and thulium fiber lasers. Perspectives from an in vitro study

This study sought to analyze the ablation rates of Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (TFL) under different settings combinations. Lasering was carried out by a computed spiral pattern through a stepper motor bearing a laser fiber. BegoStones were placed inside a water container and lasered therein and the ablation rate was calculated. Different combinations were tested for ~12 Watts (W) for Ho:YAG and TFL lasers. Further 25 W combination for TFL were conducted testing higher frequencies. One-hundred-one experiments were conducted. Under ~12 W, the highest ablation rate for Ho:YAG was obtained with 40 Hz/0.3 J, and Virtual Basket™ (VB) emission mode [114.35 (88.30 - 126.40) mg/min] whereas for TFL, using 40 Hz/0.3 J, and long pulse [143.40 (137.40 - 146) mg/min]. A matched-comparison for 12 Hz/1 J settings showed that TFL outperformed Ho:YAG using medium pulse [63.30 (55.30 - 81.30) vs 132.00 (115.70 - 228.60) mg/min, p=0.016] and long pulse [62.90 (51.60 - 78.90) vs 134.70 (110.60 - 149.30) mg/min, p=0.016]. In the 40 Hz/0.3 J settings, TFL outperformed Ho:YAG (p=0.034). Nonetheless, Ho:YAG with VB's ablation rate increased [114.35 (88.30 - 126.40)], being comparable to that of TFL with medium pulse [127.5 (88.90 - 141.70)] (p=0.400). In TFL 25 W experiments, the ablation rate of 500 Hz / 0.05 J, was higher than those of 1000 Hz / 0.025 J (p=0.049). TFL ablation rate is higher than that of Ho:YAG. Moreover, the Virtual Basket™ emission mode, increased Ho:YAG ablation rates, resulting reaching similar to that of TFL in certain modalities.