Novel Thulium Fiber Laser for Enucleation of Prostate: A Retrospective Comparison with Open Simple Prostatectomy

A Comparison of the First 60 Enucleation Cases Using a Thulium Fiber Laser without a Mentor to a Transurethral Resection of the Prostate (TURP) and Open Prostatectomy, and the Learning Curve

Background and Objectives: In the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), laser enucleation of the prostate is recommended as an alternative to transurethral resection (TURP) and open prostatectomy (OP). The thulium fiber laser, with its superficial penetration depth, can offer a rapid learning process by causing less heat injury and capsule damage. This study compares the first 60 cases of an endourologist performing thulium fiber enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) without a mentor to the results of OP and TURP performed by experienced surgeons. It also identifies the case number at which the operation time for ThuFLEP starts to plateau. Materials and Methods: Between 1 November 2021 and 1 November 2023, the initial 60 ThuFLEP cases of an endourologist with no prior enucleation experience were compared with TURP and OP operations performed by experienced surgeons. Since the first 60 ThuFLEP cases involved 80-120 cc prostates, TURP and OP operations within this size range performed during the same period were included in the study. The groups were assessed for age, preoperative and postoperative prostate volume, PSA levels, the IPSS, the IPSS Quality of Life (QoL), and maximum urinary flow (Qmax). The 60 consecutive ThuFLEP cases were divided into three groups of 20 (Groups 1, 2, and 3) and compared for operation time, IPSS, and Qmax. Results: The operation time for TURP was shorter than for ThuFLEP and OP (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between ThuFLEP and OP in postoperative Qmax and IPSS, while TURP had lower values than the other two methods. For ThuFLEP, the operation time was longer in the first 20 cases but plateaued in groups 2 and 3 (p < 0.001). Postoperative Qmax and IPSS values showed no significant differences among the three ThuFLEP groups (p > 0.05). Conclusions: For large prostates, ThuFLEP provides better postoperative results than TURP and offers shorter catheterization and hospital stay times than OP. Its short learning curve makes it a preferable method for treating BPH compared to other laser techniques.

Prospective randomized multicenter study to evaluate holmium vs. new thulium fiber laser for prostate enucleation

BACKGROUND

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) commonly causes lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men. Holmium (HoLEP) and thulium (ThuLEP) laser enucleation are established techniques for BPH treatment. Thulium fiber laser (TFL) for prostate enucleation (ThuFLEP) shows promising outcomes.

METHODS

A prospective randomized multicenter study was conducted. Patients with BPH and LUTS unresponsive to medical therapy were enrolled. Preoperative, surgical, perioperative and postoperative data were recorded with follow-up at 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome was functional improvement, and the secondary outcome was safety in terms of complications.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients were included (HoLEP 100, ThuFLEP 100). No significant baseline difference was found between groups. At 3 and 6 months we found statistically significant improvements from baseline for both HoLEP and ThuFLEP in efficacy: International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS), IPSS-Quality of Life (QoL), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), and post-void residual volume (PVR; P<0.05). At 6 months, mean±SD IPSS, IPSS-QoL, Qmax, and PVR for HoLEP vs. ThuFLEP were 5.8±4.9 vs. 4.8±5.0 points (P=0.57), 1.6±1.4 vs. 0.7±1.1 points (P=0.09), 29.9±12.5 vs. 29.6±8.0 mL/s (P=0.8), and 16.3±17.7 vs. 15.5±13.4 mL (P=0.92), respectively. No intraoperative complication was recorded. No Clavien-Dindo ≥III complications occurred during hospitalization. After 6 months, 8 (8%) and 6 (6%) patients reported mild stress urinary incontinence in HoLEP and ThuFLEP groups, respectively (P=0.24). Urethral stenosis was observed in 3 men (3%) in the HoLEP group and 1 subject (1%) in the ThuFLEP group (P=0.72).

CONCLUSIONS

HoLEP and ThuFLEP are effective and safe for BPH treatment, with comparable functional outcomes and complication rates at 6 months. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Evaluation of the learning curve for Thulium fiber laser enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP): retrospective study of a single-surgeon experience in real-world settings

PURPOSE

To assess the learning curve of Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP) of a single surgeon inexperienced in laser endoscopic enucleation of prostate (EEP).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients with benign prostate hyperplasia undergoing ThuFLEP at our center between January 2022 and August 2023 by one surgeon. Inclusion criteria were International Prostate Symptom Score > 7, prostate volume < 200 g, and maximal urinary flow rate < 15 mL/s. The surgeon was inexperienced in laser EEP and trained by watching educational videos of ThuFLEP before starting to perform the procedure under mentoring during the first 4 cases. Procedural data (enucleation and morcellation efficiency, complications) and functional results up to 3 months were evaluated. Patients were divided into 4 cohorts of 20 consecutive cases to evaluate outcomes evolution throughout time.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 69.9 years (SD 7.8) and mean prostate volume was 89.9 g (SD 25.8). Preoperative functional parameters were comparable between the groups. Mean enucleation efficiency (EE) ratio and morcellation efficiency (ME) ratio reached respectively 0.78 g/min (SD 0.55) and 2.49 g/min (SD 1.03) and both variables significantly increased from group 1 to group 3 (p < 0,001). Perioperative complications remained low throughout the caseload with similar significant 3-month functional improvements between all groups.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to evaluate ThuFLEP learning curve for a single surgeon inexperienced in laser EEP with limited mentoring. Under these real-world conditions, nearly 60 cases were needed to complete the learning curve with a complications rate remaining low throughout the training process.

Comparative efficacy and safety of greenlight and thulium laser vaporization techniques for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of greenlight (PVP) and thulium laser vaporization (ThuVAP) in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (BPH) treatment. A systematic literature search was conducted in databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CNKI, Wangfang, and VIP in November 2023. Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the primary outcomes of interest were performed. The review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42023491316. A total of 13 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared to PVP, ThuVAP had a shorter operation time (MD: 8.56, 95% CI: 4.10 ~ 13.03, p = 0.0002), and higher postoperative transfusion (OR:0.26, 95% CI: 0.10 ~ 0.64, p = 0.004). However, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of length of stay (MD: -0.32, 95% CI: -0.78 ~ 0.14, p = 0.17), catherization time (MD: 0.03, 95% CI: -0.13 ~ 0.19, p = 0.73), international prostate symptom score improvement (MD: 0.23, 95% CI: -0.36 ~ 0.81, p = 0.45), quality of life improvement (MD: 0.04, 95% CI: -0.04 ~ 0.12, p = 0.29), maximum urinary flow rate improvement (MD: -0.59, 95% CI: -1.42 ~ 0.24, p = 0.16), postvoid residual urine volume improvement (MD: 1.04, 95% CI: -6.63 ~ 8.71, p = 0.79), overall postoperative complications (OR:1.15, 95% CI: 0.65 ~ 2.03, p = 0.63), postoperative bleeding (OR:1.18, 95%  CI: 0.67 ~ 2.07, p = 0.56), re-peration (OR:0.55, 95% CI: 0.16 ~ 1.95, p = 0.35), urethral stricture (OR:0.90, 95% CI: 0.46 ~ 1.75, p = 0.75), and urinary incontinence (OR:1.07, 95% CI: 0.64 ~ 1.78, p = 0.80). The results of subgroup analysis showed that the results of comparing thulium vaporesection or vapoenucleation with PVP were consistent with the results of the pooled analysis. Both greenlight and thulium laser vaporization are effective and safe, with comparable surgical and functional outcomes. The choice between these methods should be based on patient-specific factors.

Comparison of HoLEP, ThuLEP and ThuFLEP in the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), Thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP) and Thulium fibre laser enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP) by performing propensity score matched analysis (PSM).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the patients who underwent HoLEP (Group 1, n = 696), ThuLEP (Group 2, n = 146) and ThuFLEP (Group 3, n = 193) surgery because of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). A 1:1:1 HoLEP: ThuLEP: ThuFLEP group matching was performed using PSM analysis. Perioperative, postoperative functional outcomes and complications were analysed and compared.

RESULTS

We observed significant improvement in functional parameters regarding IPSS, Qmax, PVR and quality of life in all groups compared to baseline values at the 1st, 6th and 12th postoperative months. There was no significant difference between different laser types in terms of urge (UUI) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) at 1st postoperative month. In all three groups, no patient had postoperative SUI or UUI at 6th and 12th postoperative months. In addition, no significant difference was observed between laser types in terms of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

HoLEP, ThuLEP and ThuFLEP are safe and effective LEP methods with improvement in functional parameters and low complication rates. Similar results in terms of functional outcomes and complications clearly show that these surgeries are alternatives to each other for the patients with BPO. Experts' opinions, practices and enucleation techniques should also be taken into consideration when choosing a laser for BPO surgery.

[Development of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate]

This article deals with lasers from their initial description to the most advanced applications in the treatment of benign prostate enlargement.

[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.

[Prostate Surgery for Benign Prostatic Syndrome >200 ml: Endoscopic, Robotic, or Open Approach]

Surgical approaches for benign prostatic hyperplasia have evolved and diversified over the past decades. While numerous studies document the efficacy of surgical procedures for moderate prostate sizes, there remains insufficient data for large prostate volumes >200 ml, leaving important questions unanswered regarding their effectiveness and safety. Consequently, selecting and adapting suitable therapeutic options for this specific patient group often poses a significant challenge. In this context, this review comprehensively summarizes and discusses current insights into surgical treatment options for large prostate volumes (>200 ml) following an extensive literature review.In summary, the surgical treatment of prostate volumes >200 ml is a challenge regardless of the chosen surgical method. Minimally invasive approaches should be considered standard practice today. Anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is a size-independent method and has the lowest morbidity. As it may be performed in spinal anaesthesia, endoscopic enucleation is feasible in patients with an increased anaesthetic risk. In extremely large prostate glands, the procedure poses challenges even for highly experienced surgeons. Especially in obese patients, the surgeon should be familiar with different exit strategies. Robot-assisted simple prostatectomy provides a minimally invasive alternative that may also treat pathologies such as diverticula or large bladder stones in the same surgical session. Due to its transabdominal approach, the morbidity and anaesthetic risk is comparatively higher. Each centre and surgeon should individually decide in which method they have the greatest expertise and which option is best suited for the specific case. In cases of limited expertise, it is advisable to refer patients to a centre with appropriate specialization.

Influence of Prostate Volume on the Incidence of Complications and Urinary Incontinence Following Thulium Fiber Laser Enucleation of the Prostate: Results from Multicenter, Real-world Experience of 2732 patients

Background

The use of the new thulium fiber laser in enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) has been introduced recently.

Objective

To evaluate complications and urinary incontinence (UI) after ThuFLEP in small and large prostate volume (PV).

Design setting and participants

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent ThuFLEP in six centers (from January 2020 to January 2023). The exclusion criteria were concomitant lower urinary tract surgery, previous prostate/urethral surgery, prostate cancer, and pelvic radiotherapy.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

Patients were divided into two groups: group 1: PV ≤80 ml; group 2: PV >80 ml. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the independent predictors of overall UI.

Results and limitations

There were 1458 patients in group 1 and 1274 in group 2. There was no significant difference in age. The median PV was 60 (61-72) ml in group 1 and 100 (90-122) ml in group 2. En bloc enucleation was employed more in group 1, while the early apical release technique was used more in group 2. The rate of prolonged irrigation for hematuria, urinary tract infection, and acute urinary retention did not differ significantly. Blood transfusion rate was significantly higher in group 2 (0.5% vs 2.0%, p = 0.001). There was no significant difference in the overall UI rate (12.3% in group 1 vs 14.7% in group 2, p = 0.08). A multivariable regression analysis showed that preoperative postvoiding urine residual (odds ratio 1.004, 95% confidence interval 1.002-1.007, p < 0.01) was the only factor significantly associated with higher odds of UI. A limitation of this study was its retrospective nature.

Conclusions

Complications and UI rates following ThuFLEP were similar in patients with a PV up to or larger than 80 ml except for the blood transfusion rate that was higher in the latter.

Patient summary

In this study, we looked at outcomes after thulium fiber laser in enucleation of the prostate stratified by PV. We found that blood transfusion was higher in men with PV >80 ml, but urinary incontinence was similar.

Flexible ureteroscopic treatment of kidney stones: How do the new laser systems change our concepts?

Objective

Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) has become a widely accepted and effective technique for treating kidney stones. With the development of new laser systems, the fURS approach has evolved significantly. This literature review aims to examine the current state of knowledge on fURS treatment of kidney stones, with a particular focus on the impact of the latest laser technologies on clinical outcomes and patient safety.

Methods

We conducted a search of the PubMed/PMC, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Databases for all randomized controlled trial articles on laser lithotripsy in September 2023 without time restriction.

Results

We found a total of 22 relevant pieces of literature. Holmium laser has been used for intracavitary laser lithotripsy for nearly 30 years and has become the golden standard for the treatment of urinary stones. However, the existing holmium laser cannot completely powder the stone, and the retropulsion of the stone after the laser emission and the thermal damage to the tissue have caused many problems for clinicians. The introduction of thulium fiber laser and Moses technology brings highly efficient dusting lithotripsy effect through laser innovation, limiting pulse energy and broadening pulse frequency.

Conclusion

While the holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser remains the primary choice for endoscopic laser lithotripsy, recent technological advancements hint at a potential new gold standard. Parameter range, retropulsion effect, laser fiber adaptability, and overall system performance demand comprehensive attention. The ablation efficacy of high-pulse-frequency devices relies on precise targeting, which may pose practical challenges.

Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate: a systematic review of the current outcomes

INTRODUCTION

One recent addition to different lasers used for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is the thulium fiber laser (TFL). The purpose of this systematic review is to present the feasibility, safety and efficacy of TFL Enucleation of the Prostate (ThuFLEP).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PubMed®, Scopus® and Cochrane® primary databases were systematically screened. The search strategy used the PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) criteria. Patients should be adults with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) undergoing ThuFLEP. While comparative studies reporting comparison of ThuFLEP to other BPO treatments were included, cohort studies with no comparison group were also accepted. Outcomes including enucleation time and complication rates were reported.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Twelve studies met all the predefined criteria and were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Mean operative time and enucleation time ranged from 46.6±10.2 to 104.5±33.6 and from 38.8±17.9 to 66.0±24.9 minutes, respectively. Most of the complications were Grade I or Grade II ones. Although TFL was found to present some advantages over older BPO treatments, its outcomes were comparable with other endoscopic enucleation approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

ThuFLEP seems to be a feasible, safe and efficient approach for BPO symptoms management. Limited evidence showed that although ThuFLEP was associated with a reduced total operative time, it was also associated with worse IPSS improvement at 1-year follow-up, when compared with MOSESTM Holmium Laser Enucleation of the Prostate (HoLEP). These findings confirm the well-established opinion that the enucleation technique itself is more important than the technology which is used.

Incidence and predictors of urinary incontinence rates after thulium fiber laser enucleation of prostate performed by single surgeon

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate the predictive clinical and operative risk factors for urinary incontinence (UI) rates following thulium fiber enucleation of benign prostate hyperplasia (ThuFLEP).

Materials and methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort review of a prospectively maintained database for patients who underwent ThuFLEP between 2021 and 2023 in our university clinic performed by a single surgeon with high experience (more than 3000 endoscopic enucleation). To perform the operation, we used a thulium fiber laser Fiberlase U3 (IRE Polus ltd, Fryazino, Russia) with operating modes of 1.5 J and 40 Hz 60 W. Postoperative UI rates and risk factors following ThuFLEP were assessed for three follow-up intervals (up to 1 months, from 1 to 3 months and after 3 months post-ThuFLEP). Statistical analysis was conducted using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

Results

Out of total 578 patients who underwent ThuFLEP, the study included 381 patients with full information about continence status. Long-term UI (more than 3 months) were found only in 1.6% cases with 0.8% for stress UI, 0.3% for urge UI and 0.5% for mixed UI. Univariate logistic regression analysis has shown that higher total laser energy (OR = 1.009; 95% CI = 1.001-1.018; p = 0.036) and enucleation technique (OR = 0.272; 95% CI = 0.113-0.656; p = 0.004 in favor of En-bloc ThuFLEP) were associated with UI overall, while at multivariable analysis only En-bloc ThuFLEP was protective factor for UI (OR = 0.302; 95%CI = 0.123-0.739; p = 0.009). For short-term UI (less than 1 months) early sphincter release was found as protective factor at both uni- and multivariate analysis compare to longer UI.

Conclusion

Short-term UI up to 3 months following ThuFLEP is associated with early sphincter release, while overall UI rates are related with enucleation technique (preferable En-bloc) and total laser energy (preferable lower energy). The surgeon should take all these risk factors into account before choosing the technique of BPH surgical treatment.

Incidence of complications and urinary incontinence following endoscopic enucleation of the prostate in men with a prostate volume of 80 ml and above: results from a multicenter, real-world experience of 2512 patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate complications and urinary incontinence (UI) after endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) stratified by prostate volume (PV).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia who underwent EEP with different energy sources in 14 centers (January 2019-January 2023).

INCLUSION CRITERIA

prostate volume ≥ 80 ml.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA

prostate cancer, previous prostate/urethral surgery, pelvic radiotherapy.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

complication rate.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

incidence of and factors affecting postoperative UI. Patients were divided into 3 groups. Group 1: PV = 80-100 ml; Group 2 PV = 101-200 ml; Group 3 PV > 200 ml. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate independent predictors of overall incontinence.

RESULTS

There were 486 patients in Group 1, 1830 in Group 2, and 196 in Group 3. The most commonly used energy was high-power Holmium laser followed by Thulium fiber laser in all groups. Enucleation, morcellation, and total surgical time were significantly longer in Group 2. There was no significant difference in overall 30-day complications and readmission rates. Incontinence incidence was similar (12.1% in Group 1 vs. 13.2% in Group 2 vs. 11.7% in Group 3, p = 0.72). The rate of stress and mixed incontinence was higher in Group 1. Multivariable regression analysis showed that age (OR 1.019 95% CI 1.003-1.035) was the only factor significantly associated with higher odds of incontinence.

CONCLUSIONS

PV has no influence on complication and UI rates following EEP. Age is risk factor of postoperative UI.

Propensity score-matched analysis comparing perioperative, functional, and safety outcomes between thulium fiber laser and bipolar enucleation of the prostate performed by a single surgeon with two years of follow-up

PURPOSE

To compare perioperative, functional, and safety outcomes between thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) and bipolar enucleation of the prostate performed by a single surgeon with use of propensity score (PS)-matched analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were from 675 patients, 422 of whom underwent ThuFLEP and bipolar enucleation by a single highly experienced surgeon. ThuFLEP was performed with Fiberlase U1 (IRE Polus Ltd.). Perioperative parameters, safety, and functional outcomes, such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), postvoid residual volume (PVR), and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) were assessed. To control for selection bias, a 1:1 PS-matched analysis was carried out using the following variables as covariates: total prostate volume, preoperative IPSS and early sphincter release.

RESULTS

Of 422 patients, 370 (87.7%) underwent ThuFLEP and 52 (12.3%) underwent bipolar enucleation. Operation, enucleation, and morcellation time were comparable between groups before and after PS-matched analysis (p=0.954, p=0.474, p=0.362, respectively). Functional parameters (IPSS, QoL, PVR, Qmax) were also comparable between groups at every time point before and after PS matching. Significant improvements in IPSS, QoL score, Qmax, and PVR were observed during the 24-month follow-up period for both ThuFLEP and bipolar enucleation without any significant differences between groups. Early and late postoperative complications before and after PS-matched analysis were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

ThuFLEP was comparable to bipolar enucleation in perioperative characteristics, improvement in voiding parameters, and complication rates. Both procedures were shown to be effective and safe in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Endoscopic enucleation of the prostate with Thulium Fiber Laser (ThuFLEP). A retrospective single-center study

PURPOSE

The aim of the present, retrospective study was to describe our initial experience and early outcomes of Thulium Fiber Laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) with the use of the FiberDust™ (Quanta System, Samarate, Italy) in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia.

METHODS

From June 2022 to April 2023, all patients who underwent endoscopic enucleation of the prostate at Urology Department of the University Hospital of Patras were included. A single surgeon utilizing the same standardized operative technique performed all the surgeries. The primary endpoints included the uneventful completion of the operation, the surgical time and any minor or major complication observed intra- or post-operatively.

RESULTS

Twenty patients with benign prostate hyperplasia were treated with ThuFLEP. All the surgeries were completed successfully and uneventfully. The enucleation phase of the operation was completed in a mean time of 45±9.1 min, while the average time needed for the morcellation was 17.65±3.42 min. No significant complications were observed intra- or post-operatively. The average hemoglobin drop was calculated to be 0.94±0.71 g/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

All the operations were successfully and efficiently completed with the use of the FiberDust™ (Quanta System, Samarate, Italy) in ThuFLEP. Significant blood loss or major complications were not observed.

Thulium fiber laser vs. holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: results of a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial

PURPOSE

Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) represents the current standard procedure for size-independent surgical therapy of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). With advent of the novel laser technology thulium fiber laser (TFL), we hypothesized that the functional outcome of TFL enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) is non-inferior compared to HoLEP.

METHODS

From October 2021 to October 2022, 150 patients with BPO were recruited for the prospective randomized trial in accordance with CONSORT. Stratified randomization into the arms ThuFLEP (n = 74) or HoLEP (n = 76) was carried out. The primary endpoint was non-inferior international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL) at three months after treatment. Secondary endpoints were rates of complications, peak flow, residual urine and operation times.

RESULTS

Preoperative characteristics showed no significant differences. Overall IPSS and QoL improved from 21 to 8 and 4 to 1.5, respectively, after three months of follow-up. No statistically significant differences between ThuFLEP and HoLEP were observed regarding median postoperative IPSS (8.5 vs. 7, p > 0.9), QoL (1 vs. 2, p = 0.6), residual urine (48 vs. 30ml, p = 0.065) and peak flow (19 vs. 17ml/s, p > 0.9). Similarly, safety profile was comparable with no statistically significant differences regarding rate of major complications (5.3 vs. 5.4%, p = 0.5), laser hemostasis time (3 vs. 2min, p = 0.2), use of additive electric coagulation (74 vs. 87%, p = 0.06) or electric coagulation time (8 vs. 8min, p = 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective, randomized trial ThuFLEP showed non-inferior results compared to HoLEP in terms of functional outcomes measured by IPSS and QoL as primary endpoint.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00032699 (18.09.2023, retrospectively registered).

Comparison of EEP and TURP long-term outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare long-term reoperation rate and functional outcomes between EEP (endoscopic enucleation of the prostate) and TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic literature review of Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted with primary outcome assessed being reoperation rate and secondary outcomes after a long term (> 3 years) being functional outcomes or related values (prostate volume, PSA level, etc.).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Five studies were found with long-term follow-up 4-7 years. EEP reoperation rate ranged from 0 to 1.27%, while from 1.7 to 17.6% for TURP. Meta-analysis showed significantly lower OR for EEP, 0.27 (95% CI 0.24-0.31), with notable homogeneity of the results, I2 = 0%. Long-term Qmax and IPSS were significantly better for EEP. Qmax pooled mean difference was 1.79 (95% CI 1.72-1.86) ml/s with a high concordance among the studies, I2 = 0%. IPSS mean difference -1.24 (95% CI - 1.28 to - 1.2) points, I2 = 57% but QoL did not differ, with mean difference being 0.01 (95% CI - 0.02 to 0.04), I2 = 0%. IIEF-5 score was also significantly better for EEP, mean difference 1.08 (95% CI 1.03-1.13), but heterogeneity was high, I2 = 70%. PSA level and prostate volume were only reported in one study and favored EEP slightly yet statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

EEP had a significantly lower reoperation rate and better functional outcomes (Qmax and IPSS) at long term compared with TURP. It may also be beneficial in terms of IIEF-5, PVR, and PSA level.

Effect of Ho:YAG laser on kidney tissue with Virtual Basket™ and Bubble Blast™ pulse modulation: an experimental ex vivo study

PURPOSE

There is a lack of studies in the literature on effects of Virtual Basket™ (VB) and Bubble Blast™ (BB) laser pulse modulations of the Ho:YAG laser on tissue. We aimed to compare the effects of standard modulation (SM), VB, and BB pulse modulations of Ho:YAG laser on kidney tissue.

METHODS

An ex vivo experiment was conducted using veal kidneys. The Quanta System Cyber Ho 100W laser generator with a broad setting spectrum at 15-80 W, 10-40 Hz, 1.5-2 J, and medium pulse duration were tested. Incision depth (ID), vaporization area (VA), coagulation area (CA), and total laser area (TLA = VA + CA) were evaluated. Histopathological measurement outcomes were grouped as a low-power group (15, 20, and 30 W) and a high-power group (40, 60, and 80 W) according to the power outputs used.

RESULTS

A total of 108 experiments were performed. In saline and high-power output (40, 60, 80 W), mean VA, TLA, and ID, histopathological measurements were higher in BB pulse modulation than VB and SM pulse modulations (p: 0.03, p: 0.001, and p: 0.003, respectively). In contrast, mean CA and LE measurements were higher in SM than in VB and BB pulse modulations (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in mean histopathological measurements of VA, CA, TLA, and ID, among SM, VB, and BB pulse modulations in the low-power output group in saline (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

VB can allow controlled dissection, as it does not create a large VA during surgical procedures. BB should be used in a controlled manner in soft tissue surgery due to its strong effect on tissues.

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.

Thulium: YAG vs continuous-wave thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate: do potential advantages of thulium fiber lasers translate into relevant clinical differences?

PURPOSE

To compare endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using a thulium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Tm:YAG) laser and a super-pulsed thulium fiber laser set in continuous-wave (CW) mode, and to evaluate whether theoretical advantages of thulium fiber lasers, related to their shorter wavelength, translate into relevant clinical differences.

METHODS

In total, 110 patients suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia were randomized to undergo either thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) or CW thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (CW-ThuFLEP). Intraoperative and postoperative variables and complications were compared. Micturition improvement was assessed at 3-month follow-up using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), post-void residual urine (PVR) and maximum flow rate (Qmax). Erectile function was evaluated using the International Index of Erectile Function-5 (IIEF-5).

RESULTS

No significant differences between the ThuLEP and CW-ThuFLEP groups were found in terms of operative time (70.69 vs 72.41 min), enucleation time (50.23 vs 53.33 min), enucleated tissue weight (40.2 vs 41.9 g), enucleation efficiency (0.80 vs 0.79 g/min), catheterization time (2.45 vs 2.57 days), hospital stay (2.82 vs 2.95 days) and hemoglobin drop (1.05 vs 1.27 g/dl). At 3-month follow-up, no significant differences were found in IPSS (5.09 vs 5.81), Qmax (26.51 vs 27.13 ml/s), PVR (25.22 vs 23.81 ml) and IIEF-5 (14.01 vs 14.54).

CONCLUSION

ThuLEP and CW-ThuFLEP were equivalent in relieving patients from LUTS and improving micturition. Theoretical advantages of the TFL, such as shallower penetration depth and improved vaporization capacity, did not translate into relevant perioperative outcomes or clinical differences.

Incidence and risk factors for postoperative urinary incontinence after various prostate enucleation procedures: systemic review and meta-analysis of PubMed literature from 2000 to 2021

PURPOSE

To evaluate the risk of urinary incontinence (UI) after various prostate enucleation procedures (PEP).

METHODS

PubMed was searched from January 2000 to July 2021 for studies investigating UI after PEP. The articles were divided into 5 subgroups: holmium, thulium, greenlight laser, electrocautery, and simple prostatectomy. Meta-analysis was performed to examine rate of stress (SUI), urge (UUI) or unspecified UI at short (< 3 months), intermediate (3-6 months), and long-term (> 6 months). The impact of age, prostate size, surgery time, laser time, postoperative nadir PSA level and technical modifications on UI was analyzed.

RESULTS

Most (69.4%) of 49 articles included employed holmium laser. There was no significant difference in incidence of short-, intermediate-, and long-term UI, SUI and UUI between five sub-groups and within different technical modifications. Although not statistically significant, the incidence of UI was higher (15%) at short-term with green-light and simple prostatectomy (95% CI 9-23 and 1-84), and higher (4%) at intermediate-term with holmium laser (95% CI 2-8). SUI was more prevalent at short-term with holmium laser (4%; 95% CI 2-5%), and at intermediate term with simple prostatectomy (3%; 95% CI 1-14). UUI was higher in the thulium group (10%, 95% CI 7-16). Increased age, surgery time, laser time and prostate size up to 80 cc were associated with higher UI. There was no correlation between postoperative PSA and UI.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no significant difference in incidence of UI, SUI and UUI after various PEP. Patients age, prostate size, surgery and laser time are linearly associated with UI.

Lasers for benign prostatic hyperplasia (hybrid, blue diode, TFL, Moses). Which one to choose?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To present the evidence of latest developments of lasers for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We focused on recent advancements in Ho:YAG laser such as Moses technology, the Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL), the blue diode laser, and hybrid laser.

RECENT FINDINGS

Laser enucleation of prostate techniques using either Ho:YAG laser with the Moses technology and Moses 2.0, or TFL seem efficient and safe compared with the standard enucleation using Ho:YAG laser. Only in vitro studies evaluated the blue diode laser and hybrid laser (combination of a continuous wave TFL and blue diode laser). Blue diode laser showed intermediate incision depth and minimal coagulation depth compared with Ho:YAG laser and Super Pulse TFL. Hybrid laser showed deep incision depth and small coagulation area compared with Ho:YAG laser and continuous wave TFL.

SUMMARY

Surgical treatment of BPH using Moses technology, Moses 2.0, and TFL shows encouraging results comparable to the standard enucleation using Ho:YAG laser. Only in vitro data are currently available for blue diode laser and hybrid laser. Future well-designed studies comparing these technologies and evaluating them on specific risk groups of patients as well as the long-term durability of outcomes are needed.

Comparative analysis of MOSESTM technology versus novel thulium fiber laser (TFL) for transurethral enucleation of the prostate: A single-institutional study

INTRODUCTION

Novel laser technologies have been developed for the minimally invasive surgical management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of MOSESTM technology versus the thulium fiber laser (TFL) in patients with BPH undergoing transurethral enucleation of the prostate.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of eighty-two patients who underwent transurethral enucleation of the prostate using MOSESTM or TFL technologies from August 2020 to September 2021. Preoperative and intraoperative parameters, in addition to postoperative outcomes, were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent transurethral enucleation of the prostate with TFL, while 62 had MOSESTM HoLEP. No statistically significant difference in preoperative characteristics was observed between the groups. Patients in the TFL group had longer median enucleation, hemostasis, and morcellation times (p < 0.001) than those in the MOSESTM cohort. The longer morcellation time of TFL is mostly related to less visibility. The postoperative outcomes IPSS, QoL, Qmax, and post void residual (PVR), were comparable between the groups at 1, 3 and 6 months. The incidence of urge urinary incontinence (p = 0.79), stress urinary incontinence (p = 0.97), and hospital readmission rates (p = 0.1) were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A satisfactory safety and efficacy profile with comparable postoperative outcomes was demonstrated for both techniques; though, MOSESTM technology was superior to TFL in terms of shorter overall operative time.

Randomized prospective trial of the severity of irritative symptoms after HoLEP vs ThuFLEP

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term postoperative functional outcomes and severity of irritative symptoms following holmium and thulium fiber laser enucleation (HoLEP and ThuFLEP).

METHODS

This prospective randomized single-blinded study was performed in accordance with CONSORT. The inclusion criteria were IPSS > 20 or Qmax < 10 ml/s. Patients were randomized between HoLEP and ThuFLEP. Demographics, objective data (PSA, prostate volume, etc.), data on urinary and sexual function (IPSS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, Qmax, ICIQ-MLUTS) were collected. Detailed perioperative information and postoperative data on functional outcomes at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 weeks and 6 months were collected.

RESULTS

Data on 163 participants were included (77-HoLEP, 86-ThuFLEP). No differences were found in surgery duration; number of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo I-III), catheterization time and hospital stay. Functional outcomes up to 6 months didn't differ between the groups (IPPS, IIEF, QoL, QUID, ICIQ-MLUTS, Qmax, p > 0.05). Total ICIQ-MLUTS, bother and voiding scores at 1 and 3 months significantly increased compared with the baseline in both groups (p < 0.05). No difference between the groups were observed. In HoLEP the SUI series rate was 1.3% and 1.3% after 3 and 6 months following the procedure; in ThuFLEP: it was 3.5% and 2.3% respectively (p = 0.35 and p = 0.54).

CONCLUSION

The preliminary results of the study showed no apparent differences in functional outcomes (IPSS, Qmax), rate of SUI or irritative symptoms. Both ThuFLEP and HoLEP are efficient ways of treating benign prostatic obstruction. Both surgeries are comparable in terms of duration and postoperative complication rates.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of transurethral laser versus open prostatectomy for patients with large-sized benign prostatic hyperplasia: A meta-analysis of comparative trials

PURPOSE

The selection of open prostatectomy (OP) over transurethral laser surgery is controversial for large volume prostates. Thus, we aim to compare the efficacy and safety of transurethral laser versus OP, and provide the latest evidence of clinical practice for large-sized benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This meta-analysis used Review Manager V5.3 software and the systematic literature search of Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science datasets was performed for citations published from 2000 to 2020 that compared transurethral laser with OP for the treatment of large BPH. Variables of interest assessing the two techniques included clinical characteristics, and the perioperation-, effectiveness-, and complication-related outcomes.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included twelve studies containing 1,514 patients, with 792 laser and 722 OP. The transurethral laser group was associated with shorter hospital stay and catheterization duration, and less hemoglobin decreased in the perioperative variables. There was no significant difference in the international prostate symptom score, post-void residual urine volume, maximum flow rate, and quality of life score. Transurethral laser group had a significantly lower incidence of blood transfusion than OP group (odds ratio, 0.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.19; p<0.001; I²=8%), and no statistical differences were found with respect to the other complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Both OP and transurethral laser prostatectomy are effective and safe treatments for large prostate adenomas. With these advantages of less blood loss and transfusion, and shorter catheterization time and hospital stay, laser may be a better choice for large BPH.

Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP). Prospective study of mid- and long-term outcomes in 1328 patients

The objective of our study was to estimate the long-term efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analysed patients who underwent ThuFLEP due to LUTS related to BPO. Both the pre- and perioperative data as well as the follow-up data for 3 years were evaluated: prostate volume, post-void residual (PVR), Qmax, IPSS and QoL, PSA level and the complication rate. Intraoperative data relating to the weight of resected tissue, the duration of surgery, catheterization and data on hospital stays were also collected. A sub-group analysis was performed to assess whether older patients (>65 years) or those with larger glands (>80 cc) are prone to increased complication risks.

RESULTS

A total of 1328 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 66.9±7.5 years. Mean prostate volume was 86.9±41.9 (20-330) cc. All the functional parameters (IPSS, QoL, PVR, Qmax) significantly improved after surgery (p<0.05) and showed durable improvement up to 3-years of follow-up. The frequency of late complications was as follows: stress urinary incontinence - 1.2%; urethral stricture -1.1%; bladder neck contracture - 0.9%. Sub-group analyses revealed increased UTI frequency in older patients (3.5% vs 0.8%, p=0.003) as well as higher rate of SUI (0.4% vs 1.8%, p=0.002) and higher rate of clot retention (11.3% vs 4.4%, p<0.001) in those with larger glands.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrespective of the patient's age and prostate volume, ThuFLEP represents an effective and durable technique of endoscopic enucleation characterized by a low incidence of complications after 3 years of follow-up. In the hands of an experienced surgeon, ThuFLEP can rightly be considered to be a promising alternative to HoLEP for treatment of LUTS associated with BPO.

En bloc resection for nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer: selecting a proper laser

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the most recent surgical lasers that have been made available to us and to evaluate their potential in performing en bloc resection of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Laser en bloc resection of bladder tumors (ERBT) can be performed with a number of laser systems including Ho:YAG, GreenLight, diode, Tm:YAG and thulium fiber lasers (TFL). The data that is currently available suggests that the water-targeting devices (utilizing water as a primary chromophore - Ho:YAG, Tm:YAG, TFL) may have a number of advantages over hemoglobin-targeting systems (potassium titanyl phosphate:YAG, lithium triborate:YAG). One recent addition to the surgical armamentarium Moses effect enhanced Ho:YAG and the TFL (being able to work both in quasi-continuous and SuperPulsed modes) necessitates careful discussion and comparison with the other available devices.

SUMMARY

The majority of available lasers have proven to be safe to use and compared to electrocautery allow for lower rates of obturator nerve reflex and result in fewer bleeding complications. The minimal penetration depth and decreased peak power of Tm:YAG and TFLs render them the devices of choice when it comes to ERBT. Unfortunately, more studies on ERBT with TFL are needed in order for us to make a sound assessment of the respective pros and cons.

Thulium laser enucleation of prostate versus laparoscopic trans-vesical simple prostatectomy in the treatment of large benign prostatic hyperplasia: head-to-head comparison

OBJECTIVES

To compare thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP) versus laparoscopic trans-vesical simple prostatectomy (LSP) in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of patients who underwent surgery for "large" BPH (>80mL) at three Institutions were collected and analyzed. Two institutions performed ThuLEP only; the third institution performed LSP only. Preoperative (indwelling catheter status, prostate volume (PVol), hemoglobin (Hb), Qmax, post-voiding residual volume (PVR), IPSS, QoL, IIEF-5) and perioperative data (operative time, enucleated adenoma, catheterization time, length of stay, Hb-drop, complications) were compared. Functional (Qmax, PVR, %ΔQmax) and patient-reported outcomes (IPSS, QoL, IIEF-5, %ΔIPSS, %ΔQoL) were compared at last follow-up.

RESULTS

80 and 115 patients underwent LSP and ThuLEP, respectively. At baseline, median PVol was 130 versus 120mL, p <0.001; Qmax 9.6 vs. 7.1mL/s, p=0.005; IPSS 21 versus 25, p <0.001. Groups were comparable in terms of intraoperative complications (1 during LSP vs. 3 during ThuLEP) and transfusions (1 per group). Differences in terms of operative time (156 vs. 92 minutes, p <0.001), Hb-drop (-2.5 vs. -0.9g/dL, p <0.001), catheterization time (5 vs. 2 days, p <0.001) and postoperative complications (13.8% vs. 0, p <0.001) favored ThuLEP. At median follow-up of 40 months after LSP versus 30 after ThuLEP (p <0.001), Qmax improved by 226% vs. 205% (p=0.5), IPSS decreased by 88% versus 85% (p=0.9), QoL decreased by 80% with IIEF-5 remaining almost unmodified for both the approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis showed that LSP and ThuLEP are comparable in relieving from BPO and improving the patient-reported outcomes. Invasiveness of LSP is more significant.

Laser endoscopic procedures on the prostate: it is the small details that count

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to highlight the pros and cons of each laser device and to consider additional possible milestones for the development of laser technologies in the surgical treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last three decades, lasers' role in endourology has gone from strength to strength. Specifically, the primary techniques where laser surgery for BPO relief is concerned are vaporization and enucleation. The idea behind vaporization is that lasers are able to vaporize substantial amounts of tissue due to deep ablation depth and increased power. The most efficient devices for vaporization are those affecting hemoglobin as primary chromophore and/or using a continuous firing mode (KTP/LBO:YAG, diode lasers, Tm:YAG). As for enucleation, multiple devices have been suggested for the adequate anatomical enucleation of the prostate (EEP). As it is a skill-dependent technique, the EEP is effective irrespective of which device the surgeon uses. However, some devices have shown significant advances where enucleation is concerned.

SUMMARY

The choice of device should be based primarily on the technique the surgeon prefers. Although the most suitable lasers for vaporization are hemoglobin-targeting and/or continuous wave devices, the EEP may be done with any enough powered laser, yet some provides specific effects which you should be aware before the surgery.

Comparison of Holmium:YAG and Thulium Fiber lasers on soft tissue : an ex vivo study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the fiber-tissue interaction through ablation, coagulation, and carbonization characteristics of the Ho:YAG laser and Super Pulsed Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL) in a non-perfused porcine kidney model. To assess the degradation of laser fibers during soft tissue treatment.

METHODS

A 50W TFL generator was compared to a 120W Ho:YAG laser. The laser settings that can be set identically between the two lasers (pulse energy and frequency), and clinically relevant for prostate laser enucleation, were identified and used for tissue incisions on fresh non-frozen porcine kidneys. For each parameter were also tested the short, medium and long pulse durations for the Ho:YAG generator, and the different peak powers 150W, 250W and 500W for the TFL. Laser incisions were performed with 550μm stripped laser fiber fixed on a robotic arm at a distance of 0.1mm with the tissue surface and at a constant speed of 10mm/s. Histological analysis was then performed, evaluating: incision shape, incision depth and width, axial coagulation depth, presence of carbonization. Degradation of the laser fiber was defined as reduction of laser fiber tip length after laser activation.

RESULTS

Incision depths and areas of coagulation were greater with the Ho:YAG laser compared to the TFL. While no carbonization zone was found with the Ho:YAG laser, this was constant with the TFL. While a fiber tip degradation was constantly observed with Ho:YAG laser, except in the case of a long pulse duration and low pulse energy (0.2J), this was not the case with TFL.

CONCLUSION

TFL appears to be an efficient alternative to Ho:YAG laser for soft tissue surgery. The histological analysis found greater tissue penetration with the Ho:YAG laser and different coagulation properties between the two lasers. These results need to be investigated in vivo to assess the clinical impact of these differences and find the optimal settings for laser prostate enucleation.

A Systematic Review of Thulium Fiber Laser: Applications and Advantages of Laser Technology in the Field of Urology

Laser technology is widely used in urological surgery, from lithotripsy, prostate surgery to en-bloc resection of tumours. While Holmium:YAG has been widely employed over the last two decades, in recent years, there has been a surge of interest in Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL), which offers theoretical advantages of better water absorption and lower stone ablation thresholds. A systematic review was conducted to assess the evidence from clinical research on TFL's application for lithotripsy and prostate surgery. It identified 357 articles and 8 (1506 patients) were selected, of which 4 clinical studies each investigated TFL enucleation of prostate (ThuFLEP) and TFL lithotripsy. For flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FURSL), stone ablation settings ranged from 0.1-4 J, and 7-300 Hz, mean operative time ranged from 23.4-39.8 minutes and lasing time ranged from 1.2-10 minutes. For stone dusting in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), settings of 0.2 J and 125-200 Hz were found to be optimal. For ThuFLEP, all studies showed a significant improvement in IPSS (International Prostate Symptom Score), urinary flow rate (Qmax), quality of life measures, and post-void residual volume, with mean operative time ranging from 67-104.5 minutes. Our review shows that there is limited evidence on the use and clinical outcomes of TFL. ThuFLEP might suggest equivalence to the widely used HoLEP in the available evidence so far. TFL lithotripsy shows promising results but further prospective, randomized trials are required to properly assess its usability, clinical effectiveness and standardisation of the settings for successful adoption of the technology.

Reasons to go for thulium-based anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate

PURPOSE

To summarize the current evidence and the reasons to go for thulium-based anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP).

METHODS

This review discusses the available literature on thulium-based AEEP.

RESULTS

Thulium lasers operate at a wavelength between 1940 and 2013 nm. This wavelength, which has a low penetration depth in water, allows to perform smooth cuts in the prostatic tissue and allows urologists to perform various procedures: resection, vaporization, enucleation, or vapoenucleation of the prostate. Depending on the type of thulium laser, it can be used either in a continuous, or pulsed mode.

CONCLUSION

In recent years, an increasing amount of evidence has described the thulium laser as a minimally invasive and size-independent treatment option for benign prostatic enlargement with excellent long-term results.

A review of thulium-fiber laser in stone lithotripsy and soft tissue surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To evaluate emerging evidence and practical applications of thulium-fiber laser (TFL) for genitourinary soft tissue disease and urinary stone disease treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

A systematic review was developed using the PubMed, ScienceDirect, Wiley, SpringerLink and Mary Ann Liebert Scopus databases between 2012 and 2020 years, using the PRISMA statement. We analyzed recent publications including in vitro and in humans outcomes of surgery using TFL. This new laser technology can be used in soft tissue diseases and stones present in the genitourinary system. Most of the comparisons are made with the Ho:YAG laser, using completely different settings. Nevertheless, TFL is safe, feasible and effective in the management of urologic diseases, showing superiority to Ho:YAG even in some studies.

SUMMARY

The introduction of pulsed TFL technology has enabled the ablation of stones at rates comparable to or better than currently existing lasers in vitro, while also potentially reducing stone retropulsion. TFL is effective in treating genitourinary soft tissue diseases, including benign prostatic hyperplasia, and early data indicate that it may be effective in the treatment of urinary stone disease. More clinical studies are needed to better understand the indications for this novel technology and clarify its position in the urologic endoscopy armamentarium.

Thulium fiber laser utilization in urological surgery: A narrative review

The thulium fiber laser (TFL) is a novel technology under active investigation as an conceivable alternative to the Holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser, which is currently the gold standard for an array of urologic procedures. The purpose of this review is to discuss the existing literature on the functionality and effectiveness of TFL in urological practice. We conducted a search of the PubMed, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, SCOPUS, Embase (OVID), and Cochrane Databases for all full articles and systematic reviews on the TFL. We found a total of 35 relevant pieces of literature. The early research findings pertaining to the TFL exhibit numerous potential advantages over the Ho:YAG laser. In vitro and ex vivo studies have highlighted the TFL's ability to utilize smaller laser fibers, obtain faster stone ablation rates, and achieve less retropulsion when tested against the Ho:YAG laser in lithotripsy. Currently, there is limited in vivo research that investigates the utilization of the TFL. The in vivo results that are available, however, look promising both for laser lithotripsy and soft tissue ablation. Indeed, the existing literature suggests that the TFL has great potential and may possess numerous technological advantages over the Ho:YAG laser, especially in laser lithotripsy. Although these early studies are promising, randomized control trials are needed to assess the full applicability of the TFL in urology.

Transurethral laser versus open simple prostatectomy for large volume prostates: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The benefit of transurethral laser prostatectomy over open simple prostatectomy (OSP) is controversial in aged symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) patients with large volume prostates, and the aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficiency of these two methods. Meta-analysis was applied using the Review Manager V5.3 software and the retrieved randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing transurethral laser prostatectomy with OSP were analyzed for the treatment of large volume prostates from 2000 to 2019 in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and EMBASE datasets. Five RCTs assessing transurethral laser prostatectomy versus OSP were considered suitable for this meta-analysis, which included a total of 448 patients, with 232 patients undergoing laser and 216 patients undergoing OSP. Compared with OSP, although transurethral laser prostatectomy required a longer operative time (weighted mean difference (WMD) 27.49 mins; 95% confidence interval (CI) 16.54-38.44; P < 0.00001) and obtained a less resected prostate weight (WMD - 11.72 g; 95% CI - 21.75 to - 1.70; P = 0.02), patients undergoing laser prostatectomy benefited from significantly less hemoglobin decline (- 0.97 g/dL; 95% CI - 1.31 to - 0.64; P < 0.00001), shorter time of catheterization (WMD - 3.67 days; 95% CI - 5.60 to - 1.75; P = 0.0002), shorter length of hospital stay (WMD - 4.75 days; 95% CI - 6.57 to - 2.93; P < 0.00001), and less blood transfusion (odds ratio 0.10; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.35; P = 0.0003). During postoperative follow-up, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in IPSS, QoL, Q_max, and PVR. Both transurethral laser prostatectomy and OSP are safe and effective for large prostates that require prostate resection. Taking into account of less blood loss, shorter catheterization time and hospital stay, and less blood transfusion, transurethral laser prostatectomy may be a better treatment for patients with large prostates.

The impact of the laser fiber-tissue distance on histological parameters in a porcine kidney model

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of the fiber-tissue distance on histological parameters in a porcine kidney model.

METHODS

Four lasers were tested at 60 W using a 600-µm bare-ended fiber: a continuous wave (cw) thulium fiber laser (TFL), a super pulsed (SP) TFL, a Ho:YAG laser, and a blue diode laser (BDL). All tissue samples were mounted on a motorized XY-translation stage. The fiber-tissue distance was changed within a range from 0to 6 mm. Ten incisions were made with each laser at each distance. Afterwards, the tissue samples were sliced with a microtome for lactate dehydrogenase staining to determine zones of thermal damage.

RESULTS

In contact mode, the largest incision depth was found for the cw TFL (1.7 ± 0.1 mm) compared to the SP TFL (1.0 ± 0.1 mm), BDL (0.9 ± 0.1 mm) and HoYAG laser (1.1 ± 0.1 mm), respectively. With regard to the coagulative properties, the SP TFL and the Ho:YAG laser showed comparable coagulation depths with 0.7 ± 0.1 and 0.6 ± 0.1 mm, respectively. At 2 mm fiber-tissue distance, the Ho:YAG laser was the only laser that vaporized tissue (incision depth: 0.2 ± 0.1 mm). The BDL was the only laser that caused coagulation at a distance of 3-5 mm.

CONCLUSION

Our results support the clinical observation that cw TFL must be defocused for best coagulation, while the coagulation depth of the SP TFL remains nearly constant within the range of 0-3 mm. Increasing the distance of the laser fiber to the tissue up to 5 mm did not cause significant differences with regard to coagulation depth using the BDL.

Thulium-fiber laser for lithotripsy: first clinical experience in percutaneous nephrolithotomy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of thulium-fiber laser (TFL) in laser lithotripsy during percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

METHODS

Patients with stones < 30 mm were prospectively recruited to undergo PCNL using TFL "FiberLase" (NTO IRE-Polus, Russia). Stone size, stone density, operative time, and "laser on" time (LOT) were recorded. Study included only cases managed with fragmentation. Stone-free rate and residual fragments were determined on postoperative computer tomography. Complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo grade. Stone retropulsion and endoscopic visibility were assessed based on surgeons' feedback using a questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients were included in the study with a mean age of 52 (± 1.8) years; of these 77 (56%) were males. Mean stone size was 12.5 (± 8.8) mm with a mean density of 1019 (± 375) HU. Mean operative time was 23.4 (± 17.9) min and mean LOT was 5.0 (± 5.7) min. Most used settings were of 0.8 J/25-30 W/31-38 Hz (fragmentation). The mean total energy for stone ablation was 3.6 (± 4.3) kJ. Overall stone-free rate was 85%. The overall complication rate was 17%. Surgeons reported stone retropulsion that interfered with surgery in 2 (1.7%) cases insignificant retropulsion was noted in 16 (10.8%) cases. Poor visualization was reported in three (2.5%) cases and minor difficulties with visibility in four (3.3%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS

TFL is a safe and effective modality for lithotripsy during PCNL and results in minimal retropulsion.

How Lasers Ablate Stones: In Vitro Study of Laser Lithotripsy (Ho:YAG and Tm-Fiber Lasers) in Different Environments

Introduction: There are two main mechanisms of stone ablation with long-pulsed infrared lasers: photothermal and photomechanical. Which of them is primary in stone destruction is still a matter of discussion. Water holds importance in both mechanisms but plays a major role in the latter. We sought to identify the prevailing mechanism of stone ablation by evaluating the stone mass loss after lithotripsy in different media. Materials and Methods: We tested a holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser (100 W; Lumenis), a thulium-fiber laser U1 (TFL U1) (120 W; NTO IRE-Polus, Russia), and a SuperPulse thulium-fiber laser U2 (TFL U2) (500 W; NTO IRE-Polus). A single set of laser parameters (15 W = 0.5 J × 30 Hz) was used. Contact lithotripsy was performed in phantoms (BegoStones) in different settings: (a) hydrated phantoms in water, (b) hydrated phantoms in air, (c) dehydrated phantoms in water, and (d) dehydrated phantoms in air. Laser ablation was performed with total energy of 0.3 kJ. Phantom mass loss was defined as the difference between the initial phantom mass and the final phantom mass of the ablated phantoms. Results: All lasers demonstrated effective ablation in hydrated phantoms ablated in water; no visual differences between the lasers were detected. The ablation of dehydrated phantoms in air was also effective with visible vapor during ablation and condensation on the cuvette wall. Dehydrated phantoms in water and in air show minimal to no ablation accompanied with formation of white crust on phantom surface. Among laser types, TFL U2 had the highest phantom mass loss in all groups except for dehydrated phantoms ablated in air. Conclusions: Our results suggest that both photothermal and thermomechanical ablation mechanisms (explosive vaporization) occur in parallel during laser lithotripsy. In Ho:YAG and TFL U2 stone ablation explosive vaporization prevails, whereas in TFL U1 ablation photothermal mechanism appears to predominate.

The laser of the future: reality and expectations about the new thulium fiber laser-a systematic review

The Holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser has been the gold-standard for laser lithotripsy over the last 20 years. However, recent reports about a new prototype thulium fiber laser (TFL) lithotripter have revealed impressive levels of performance. We therefore decided to systematically review the reality and expectations for this new TFL technology. This review was registered in the PROSPERO registry (CRD42019128695). A PubMed search was performed for papers including specific terms relevant to this systematic review published between the years 2015 and 2019, including already accepted but not yet published papers. Additionally, the medical sections of ScienceDirect, Wiley, SpringerLink, Mary Ann Liebert publishers, and Google Scholar were also searched for peer-reviewed abstract presentations. All relevant studies and data identified in the bibliographic search were selected, categorized, and summarized. The authors adhered to PRISMA guidelines for this review. The TFL emits laser radiation at a wavelength of 1,940 nm, and has an optical penetration depth in water about four-times shorter than the Ho:YAG laser. This results in four-times lower stone ablation thresholds, as well as lower tissue ablation thresholds. As the TFL uses electronically-modulated laser diodes, it offers the most comprehensive and flexible range of laser parameters among laser lithotripters, with pulse frequencies up to 2,200 Hz, very low to very high pulse energies (0.005-6 J), short to very long-pulse durations (200 µs up to 12 ms), and a total power level up to 55 W. The stone ablation efficiency is up to four-times that of the Ho:YAG laser for similar laser parameters, with associated implications for speed and operating time. When using dusting settings, the TFL outperforms the Ho:YAG laser in dust quantity and quality, producing much finer particles. Retropulsion is also significantly reduced and sometimes even absent with the TFL. The TFL can use small laser fibers (as small as 50 µm core), with resulting advantages in irrigation, scope deflection, retropulsion reduction, and (in)direct effects on accessibility, visibility, efficiency, and surgical time, as well as offering future miniaturization possibilities. Similar to the Ho:YAG laser, the TFL can also be used for soft tissue applications such as prostate enucleation (ThuFLEP). The TFL machine itself is seven times smaller and eight times lighter than a high-power Ho:YAG laser system, and consumes nine times less energy. Maintenance is expected to be very low due to the durability of its components. The safety profile is also better in many aspects, i.e., for patients, instruments, and surgeons. The advantages of the TFL over the Ho:YAG laser are simply too extensive to be ignored. The TFL appears to be a real alternative to the Ho:YAG laser and become a true game-changer in laser lithotripsy. Due to its novelty, further studies are needed to broaden our understanding of the TFL, and comprehend the full implications and benefits of this new technology, as well its limitations.