Intrarenal thermal and pressure dynamics during ureteroscopy: an <i>in vitro</i> study

Objectives To evaluate in vitro determinants of intrarenal temperature (IRT) and pressure (IRP) during laser lithotripsy. Materials and Methods A silicone urinary tract model was used to perform laser lithotripsy on artificial stones placed in the renal pelvis. Three laser sources (thulium fibre laser, holmium:yttrium‐aluminium‐garnet [Ho:YAG] with Magneto Technology, and pulsed thulium:YAG) with 200‐μm fibres were tested at four energy settings (0.6 J–10 Hz, 1 J–10 Hz, 0.2 J–50 Hz, and 1 J–40 Hz), delivering 2000 J per experiment. Irrigation was provided by gravity (40 cmH 2 O) or hand‐pump irrigation, combined with a standard ureteral access sheath (sUAS) or flexible and navigable suction sheath (FANS). Multivariable regression identified predictors of mean IRT and IRP. Results Baseline temperatures were comparable among groups (27.2–32.2 °C, P &gt; 0.05). Hand‐pump irrigation reduced mean IRT compared to gravity (−9.1 °C, P = 0.001). Laser power showed a dose–response effect (10 W: +2.5 °C, P = 0.003; 40 W: +8.2 °C, P = 0.001 vs 6 W). At equivalent power and irrigation settings, laser source did not influence IRT under the experimental conditions evaluated. The thermal‐risk threshold (&gt;43 °C) was reached in 16.7% of experiments, increased with power (2.8%, 15.3%, and 41.7% at 6, 10, and 40 W; P = 0.001) and decreased with hand‐pump irrigation and FANS ( P &lt; 0.05). Hand‐pump irrigation increased IRP by 21 cmH 2 O compared to gravity, while FANS reduced IRP by 12 cmH 2 O vs sUAS ( P = 0.001). Conclusions Mean IRT was associated with laser power and irrigation strategy. High‐power settings (40 W) frequently exceeded the thermal‐risk threshold. Although FANS was not associated with lower mean IRT, it reduced the likelihood of exceeding the thermal‐risk threshold. Laser source had no effect on mean IRT when power and irrigation conditions were comparable. Mean IRP was influenced by irrigation strategy and UAS configuration but was not associated with mean IRT. These findings underscore the need for advanced integrated irrigation–aspiration systems capable of dynamic control of flow, pressure, and temperature to optimise procedural safety.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of Urology
Published
2026-07-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.70384
Primary Topic
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Intrarenal thermal and pressure dynamics during ureteroscopy: an in vitro study

Stefano Moretto, Esteban Emiliani, Alejandra Bravo‐Balado, Federico Zorzi et al.
British Journal of Urology
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
article

Intrarenal thermal and pressure dynamics during ureteroscopy: an in vitro study

Stefano Moretto, Esteban Emiliani, Alejandra Bravo‐Balado, Federico Zorzi, Frédéric Panthier, Letizia Maria Ippolita Jannello, Alberto Quarà, Frédéric Coste, Steeve Doizi, Mariela Corrales, Olivier Traxer
article en

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate in vitro determinants of intrarenal temperature (IRT) and pressure (IRP) during laser lithotripsy. Materials and Methods A silicone urinary tract model was used to perform laser lithotripsy on artificial stones placed in the renal pelvis. Three laser sources (thulium fibre laser, holmium:yttrium‐aluminium‐garnet [Ho:YAG] with Magneto Technology, and pulsed thulium:YAG) with 200‐μm fibres were tested at four energy settings (0.6 J–10 Hz, 1 J–10 Hz, 0.2 J–50 Hz, and 1 J–40 Hz), delivering 2000 J per experiment. Irrigation was provided by gravity (40 cmH 2 O) or hand‐pump irrigation, combined with a standard ureteral access sheath (sUAS) or flexible and navigable suction sheath (FANS). Multivariable regression identified predictors of mean IRT and IRP. Results Baseline temperatures were comparable among groups (27.2–32.2 °C, P &gt; 0.05). Hand‐pump irrigation reduced mean IRT compared to gravity (−9.1 °C, P = 0.001). Laser power showed a dose–response effect (10 W: +2.5 °C, P = 0.003; 40 W: +8.2 °C, P = 0.001 vs 6 W). At equivalent power and irrigation settings, laser source did not influence IRT under the experimental conditions evaluated. The thermal‐risk threshold (&gt;43 °C) was reached in 16.7% of experiments, increased with power (2.8%, 15.3%, and 41.7% at 6, 10, and 40 W; P = 0.001) and decreased with hand‐pump irrigation and FANS ( P &lt; 0.05). Hand‐pump irrigation increased IRP by 21 cmH 2 O compared to gravity, while FANS reduced IRP by 12 cmH 2 O vs sUAS ( P = 0.001). Conclusions Mean IRT was associated with laser power and irrigation strategy. High‐power settings (40 W) frequently exceeded the thermal‐risk threshold. Although FANS was not associated with lower mean IRT, it reduced the likelihood of exceeding the thermal‐risk threshold. Laser source had no effect on mean IRT when power and irrigation conditions were comparable. Mean IRP was influenced by irrigation strategy and UAS configuration but was not associated with mean IRT. These findings underscore the need for advanced integrated irrigation–aspiration systems capable of dynamic control of flow, pressure, and temperature to optimise procedural safety.

British Journal of Urology
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES), AOL (United States) (US), Humanitas University (IT), University of Trieste (IT), ParisTech (FR), Sorbonne Université (FR), NYU Langone Health (US), Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR), Collaborative Research Group (AU), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Clermont-Ferrand (FR), HESAM Université (FR), Puigvert Foundation (ES), Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IT), Ospedale San Luigi Gonzaga (IT), Hôpital Tenon (FR), Analyse, Recherche, Développement et Evaluation en Endourologie et Lithiase Urinaire (FR), University of Turin (IT)
European Association of Urology
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
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.