Assessment of Holmium:YAG, Pulsed-Thulium:YAG and Thulium Fiber Lasers for Urinary Stone Ablation. <i>In Vitro</i> Study

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> To evaluate the ablation speed (AS), laser efficiency and direct thermal lesions during urinary stone lithotripsy with the current available laser technologies: Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG), pulsed-Thulium:YAG (p-Tm:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (TFL) <i>in vitro</i> using different laser settings. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> Ho:YAG, p-Tm:YAG, and TFL laser system were used in an <i>in vitro</i> ureteral model with a volume of 125 mm<sup>3</sup> Begostone. The following parameters were tested across all laser devices: 0.6J/10 Hz (6 W), 0.6 J/20 Hz (12 W), 1.5 J/10 Hz (15 W), and 1.5 J/20 Hz (30 W), employing short pulse width for all lasers and long pulse width for Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG. Ten participants conducted the experimental setup during 3-minutes laser on time, combining the laser technology, settings, and pulse widths, with a total of 20 different combinations. The efficiency, AS and ureteral damage resulting from each intervention were analyzed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> p-Tm:YAG and TFL demonstrated significantly higher efficiency compared with Ho:YAG (0.049 ± 0.02 Δgr/KJ and 0.042 ± 0.01 Δgr/KJ <i>vs</i> 0.029 ± 0.01 Δgr/KJ; <i>p</i> < 0.05). In all laser sources, as the power increases, the AS also increases (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Furthermore, only at high-energy settings (1.5 J) higher frequency led to increase AS (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Both, p-Tm:YAG and TFL exhibited higher AS compared to Ho:YAG (0.64 ± 0.33 Δgr/s and 0.62 ± 0.31 Δgr/s <i>vs</i> 0.44 ± 0.22 Δgr/s; <i>p</i> < 0.05). Regarding ureteral injuries, as the power increases, there is a higher chance of ureteral damage (<i>p</i> = 0.031). No differences were observed between laser technologies (<i>p</i> = 0.828). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Both, p-Tm:YAG and TFL exhibited superior performances during laser lithotripsy compared with Ho:YAG, as they demonstrated higher efficiency and ablation speed. Thermal damage did not appear to be associated with specific laser equipment, but higher grades of lesions are described by increasing power.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Endourology
Published
2024-09-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2024.0349
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.35
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of Holmium:YAG, Pulsed-Thulium:YAG and Thulium Fiber Lasers for Urinary Stone Ablation. In Vitro Study

Carmen E. Castillo, Alba Sierra, Olivier Traxer, Asier Mercadé et al.
8 citations
Journal of Endourology
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
3.35
article

Assessment of Holmium:YAG, Pulsed-Thulium:YAG and Thulium Fiber Lasers for Urinary Stone Ablation. In Vitro Study

Carmen E. Castillo, Alba Sierra, Olivier Traxer, Asier Mercadé, Frédéric Panthier, Lluís Peri, Antonio Alcaraz, Juan Manuel López, Pilar Luqué
article en
8 citations

Abstract

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> To evaluate the ablation speed (AS), laser efficiency and direct thermal lesions during urinary stone lithotripsy with the current available laser technologies: Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG), pulsed-Thulium:YAG (p-Tm:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (TFL) <i>in vitro</i> using different laser settings. <b><i>Materials and Methods:</i></b> Ho:YAG, p-Tm:YAG, and TFL laser system were used in an <i>in vitro</i> ureteral model with a volume of 125 mm<sup>3</sup> Begostone. The following parameters were tested across all laser devices: 0.6J/10 Hz (6 W), 0.6 J/20 Hz (12 W), 1.5 J/10 Hz (15 W), and 1.5 J/20 Hz (30 W), employing short pulse width for all lasers and long pulse width for Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG. Ten participants conducted the experimental setup during 3-minutes laser on time, combining the laser technology, settings, and pulse widths, with a total of 20 different combinations. The efficiency, AS and ureteral damage resulting from each intervention were analyzed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> p-Tm:YAG and TFL demonstrated significantly higher efficiency compared with Ho:YAG (0.049 ± 0.02 Δgr/KJ and 0.042 ± 0.01 Δgr/KJ <i>vs</i> 0.029 ± 0.01 Δgr/KJ; <i>p</i> < 0.05). In all laser sources, as the power increases, the AS also increases (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Furthermore, only at high-energy settings (1.5 J) higher frequency led to increase AS (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Both, p-Tm:YAG and TFL exhibited higher AS compared to Ho:YAG (0.64 ± 0.33 Δgr/s and 0.62 ± 0.31 Δgr/s <i>vs</i> 0.44 ± 0.22 Δgr/s; <i>p</i> < 0.05). Regarding ureteral injuries, as the power increases, there is a higher chance of ureteral damage (<i>p</i> = 0.031). No differences were observed between laser technologies (<i>p</i> = 0.828). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Both, p-Tm:YAG and TFL exhibited superior performances during laser lithotripsy compared with Ho:YAG, as they demonstrated higher efficiency and ablation speed. Thermal damage did not appear to be associated with specific laser equipment, but higher grades of lesions are described by increasing power.

Journal of EndourologyVol. 38(11)
Sorbonne Université (FR), Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR), Hospital Clínic de Barcelona (ES), Hôpital Tenon (FR), Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
3.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.