High- and Low-Power Laser Lithotripsy Achieves Similar Results: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Available Clinical Series

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.

Ho:YAG laser and dusting-high power vs low power: there is no difference

The introduction of the Ho:YAG laser 3 decades ago revolutionized the endoscopic treatment of urolithiasis. Since then, a variety of innovations have continued to evolve these devices, including the development of high-power lasers capable of high-frequency lithotripsy. The clinical utility of high-frequency lithotripsy, however, has not necessarily lived up to the potential suggested by in vitro studies. A review of the relevant literature, confirming strong similarities between the outcomes associated with high and lower power laser lithotripsy, follows.

High-power Holmium:Yag lithotripsy in bladder urolithiasis: Is it safe and effective? A combined clinical and experimental study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Holmium: Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Ho:YAG) laser in bladder lithotripsy using high-power settings > 100 W.

Materials and Methods

A combined experimental and clinical study was conducted. The Quanta Cyber: Ho 150 with a 550 μm Quanta optical fiber was utilized in all set-ups. Ablation rates for soft and hard artificial stones were tested in vitro using 100 W and 20 W power settings. In the experiment, a porcine bladder was used. The optical fiber was inserted through a rigid cystoscope, whilst a K-type thermocouple was inserted in the bladder dome. The tested high-power settings were 152 W, 120 W and 105 W. In every trial, the lasing time was over 60 s. In the clinical study, 35 patients underwent transurethral high-power bladder lithotripsy. Laser settings were set between 100 W and 150 W.

Results

Stone mass (stone weight) was significantly lower after stone ablation independently of the stone type or the laser settings. Significantly higher mass decrease and ablation rate were detected in high-power compared to low-power settings. In the experiment, the highest temperature recorded was 32°C at 152 W. At 120 W and 105 W, the peak temperatures didn't reach 30°C. In the clinical study, a stone-free rate of 100% and a mean operative time of 43 ± 18 min were reported. All patients stayed in the hospital for one day except for one who presented minor hematuria. Additional complications did not occur.

Conclusion

Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy > 100 W is an effective, fast and safe modality for the treatment of bladder calculi.

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.

Effects of administration of local aminophylline on patients undergoing ureteroscopic lithotripsy

INTRODUCTION

The presence of ureteral stones can cause pain, infections of urinary tract and hydronephrosis, resulting in the loss of renal function. For two decades, Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL) attained a big rise and is the first line management for large ureteric stones and renal stones up to 2 cm. The present study was conducted to assess the success rate of ureteroscopic lithotripsy in treatment of ureteric calculus after local administration of aminophylline.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

100 patients having ureteric calculi <20 mm in size, aged 20-60 years were included in the study and randomly divided into Group A (n = 50) with administration of local aminophylline and Group B (n = 50) with administration of saline infusion. Ureteroscopy was performed after 5 min of administration of the solution. URSL was done using pneumatic lithoclast and/or laser. Various parameters like duration of procedure, ease of ureteral access, requirement of DJ Stent and need of further operative interventions were compared between case and control groups. The data was collected and then subjected to statistical analysis using IBM SPSS 20.0 version at significance level of p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean age of study subjects having ureteral stones was found to be between 31 and 40 years of age with males being more affected. We observed less mean duration of surgery, higher success rate, easy ureteral access (p-value < 0.05) with aminophylline use than control group. The need of ureteral stent and Auxiliary procedures was significantly higher in the control than in the case group (38%).

CONCLUSION

The use of aminophylline has been found to be highly useful and effective in reducing the need of stents and secondary surgery, decreased pain, and increased success rate. Thus, the use of aminophylline is recommended during URSL procedure for the successful management of ureteral calculi.

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.

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 [...].

Ablation rates with Holmium:YAG and Thulium Fiber Laser: Influence of the stone phantom homogeneity. An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

The lithotripsy efficiency (LE) in vitro study requires artificial or human stone samples (AS, HS). With the development of dusting lithotripsy, less ex vivo HS are available. We aimed to compare Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL) and Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG)'s LE and define the most accurate LE parameter.

METHODS

Hard and soft homogenous- and heterogenous-AS (Ho-AS, He-AS) were made to reproduce calcium-oxalate monohydrate and uric acid stones, respectively by a rapid or slow brewing of BegostonePlus (Bego) and distilled water. One hundred and fifty and 272μm-laser fibers, connected to 50W-TFL and 30W-HoYAG generators, compared three settings for TFL (FD: 0.15J/100Hz; D: 0.5J/30Hz; Fr: 1J/15Hz) and two for Ho:YAG (D-Fr). An experimental setup consisted in immerged 10mm cubic stone phantoms with a 20 seconds' lasing spiral, in contact mode, repeated four times. Stones were dried, weighted and μ-scanned (ablation weight and volume [AW and AV]).

RESULTS

With He-AS, dusting AV were four- and three-fold higher with TFL compared to Ho:YAG against hard and soft (P<0.05). In fragmentation, AV were two-fold higher with TFL compared to Ho:YAG against hard (P<0.05) and soft (P<0.05). Experiments with Ho-AS were associated with non-significant differences when comparing TFL-150μm and TFL-272μm. The ablation weight-volume correlation coefficients was higher with Ho-AS than with He-AS (P<0.0001), and with hard than soft AS. If the LE can be estimated by the AW with hard AS, this approximation is not consistent for soft AS.

CONCLUSION

TFL presented higher ablation rates than Ho:YAG, significant with He-AS. If the AW is acceptable and less expensive for hard Ho-AS, AV are more accurate for He-AS, which are suggested to imitate closely HS.

Retrograde intra renal surgery and safety: pressure and temperature. A systematic review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS) with laser lithotripsy represents the gold-standard to treat renal stones up to 20 mm. Controlling intraoperative parameters such as intrarenal pressure (IRP) and temperature (IRT) is mandatory to avoid complications. This article reviews advances in IRP and IRT over the last 2 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

We conducted a PubMed/Embase search and reviewed publications that include temperature and pressure during RIRS. Thirty-four articles have been published which met the inclusion criteria. Regarding IRP, a consensus has emerged to control IRP during RIRS, in order to avoid (barotraumatic and septic) complications. Several monitoring devices are under evaluation but none of them are clinically approved for RIRS. Ureteral access sheath, low irrigation pressure and occupied working channel help to maintain a low IRP. Robotic systems and suction devices would improve IRP intraoperative management and monitoring. IRT determinants are the irrigation flow and laser settings. Low power settings(<20 W) with minimal irrigation flow (5-10 ml/min) are sufficient to maintain low IRT and allows continuous laser activation.

SUMMARY

Recent evidence suggests that IRP and IRT are closely related. IRP depends on inflow and outflow rates. Continuous monitoring would help to avoid surgical and infectious complications. IRT depends on the laser settings and the irrigation flow.

Lasers for stone lithotripsy: advantages/disadvantages of each laser source

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article was to make a narrative review of the literature in search of all articles regarding thulium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (YAG), thulium laser fiber (TFL) and holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) for lithotripsy from 2020 to 2023. A selection of articles of special interest and best evidence was made in order to give a better perspective on their advantages and disadvantages.

RECENT FINDINGS

New Ho:YAG technologies of as high power, high frequency and pulsed modulations have shown promising results for lithotripsy by reducing retropulsion with good ablation efficiency. High peak power makes it particularly good for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. High intrarenal temperatures and correct setting are still concerning points.TFL has arrived to be one of the main players in flexible ureteroscopy. Being highly efficient and quick, and by producing micro-dusting the laser is quickly heading to become a gold standard. The new pulsed Thulium YAG is the newest laser. For now, only in-vitro studies show promising results with efficient lithotripsy. As the peak power lies between Ho:YAG and TFL it may be able to adequately perform when needing and low power lithotripsy.

SUMMARY

Several new technologies have been developed in the last years for stone lithotripsy. All being efficient and safe if well used. Different advantages and disadvantages of each laser must be taken into consideration to give each laser the proper indication.

Ureteroscopy and lasertripsy with pop dusting using high power holmium laser for large urinary stones > 15 mm: 6.5-year prospective outcomes from a high-volume stone center

INTRODUCTION

Ureteroscopy and stone lasertripsy (URSL) is a recognized technique for treatment of urinary tract stones. Holmium:Yag laser has been successfully used for this purpose for the last two decades. More lately, pulse modulation with Moses technology and high power lasers have been introduced with the result of faster and more efficient stone lasertripsy. Pop dusting is a two-stage combined treatment using a long pulse Ho:YAG laser, initially in contact mode with the stone 'dusting' (0.2-0.5 J/40-50 Hz) followed by non-contact mode 'pop-dusting' (0.5-0.7 J/20-50 Hz). We wanted to look at the outcomes of lasertripsy for renal and ureteric stones using a high-power laser machine.

METHODS

Over a period of 6.5 years (January 2016-May 2022), we prospectively collected data for patients undergoing URSL for stones larger than 15 mm treated using high power Ho:YAG laser (60W Moses or 100W laser). Patient parameters, stone demographics and outcomes of URSL were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 201 patients, underwent URSL for large urinary stones. In 136 patients (61.6%) stones were multiple and the mean single and cumulative stone size was 18 mm and 22.4 mm respectively. A pre- and post-operative stent was placed in 92 (41.4%) and 169 (76%) respectively. The initial and final stone free rate (SFR) were 84.5% and 94% respectively and 10% patients underwent additional procedure to achieve stone free status. 7 (3.9%) complications were recorded, all related to UTI/sepsis, with 6 Clavien II and 1 Clavien IVa complication.

CONCLUSION

Dusting and pop-dusting has shown to be successful and safe with the ability to treat large, bilateral or multiple stones with low retreatment and complication rates.

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.

Comparison of Low-Power vs High-Power Holmium lasers in pediatric RIRS outcomes

OBJECTIVES

to compare the outcomes of using low-power (up to 30W) vs high-power (up to 120W) holmium lasers in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in children and to analyse if lasering techniques and the use of access sheath have any influence on the outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data from 9 centres of children who underwent RIRS with holmium laser for the treatment of kidney stones between January 2015 and December 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: high-power and low-power holmium laser. Clinical, perioperative variables and complications were analysed. Outcomes were compared between groups using Student's T-test for continuous variables, and Chi-square and Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. A multivariable logistic regression analysis model was also performed.

RESULTS

314 patients were included. A high-power and low-power holmium laser was used in 97 and 217 patients, respectively. Clinical and demographic variables were comparable between both groups, except for stone size where the low-power group treated larger stones (mean 11.11 mm vs 9.70 mm; p 0.018). In the high-power laser group, a reduction in surgical time was found (mean 64.29 min vs 75.27 min; p 0.018) with a significantly higher stone-free rate (SFR) (mean 81.4% vs 59%; p <0.001). We found no statistical differences in complication rates. The multivariate logistic regression model showed lower SFR in the low-power holmium group, especially with larger (p = 0.011) and multiple stones (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our real-world pediatric multicenter study favours high-power holmium laser and establishes its safety and efficacy in children.  .

Temperature change during laser upper-tract endourological procedures: current evidence and future perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the most recent data on temperatures produced during laser lithotripsy and to provide several strategies for maintaining lower values and reducing the risk of complications during endourological treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

Endourologists have access to a wide range of alternatives with the help of the holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG), thulium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (TM:YAG), and thulium fiber laser (TFL) that compose a robust and adaptable laser lithotripsy armamentarium. Nevertheless, the threat of thermal damage increases as the local temperature rises with high total power. Most endourologists are not familiar with normal and pathological temperature ranges, how elevated temperatures affect perioperative problems, or how to avoid them.

SUMMARY

Increased temperatures experienced during laser lithotripsy may affect the course of the healing process. All lasers display a safe temperature profile at energies below 40 W. At equal power settings, Ho:YAG, Tm:YAG, and TFL lasers change the temperature comparably. Shorter on/off laser activation intervals, chilled irrigation, open irrigation systems, and UASs all aid in maintaining acceptable temperatures.

Best Practice in Interventional Management of Urolithiasis: An Update from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel for Urolithiasis 2022

PURPOSE

The European Association of Urology (EAU) has updated its guidelines on clinical best practice in urolithiasis for 2021. We therefore aimed to present a summary of best clinical practice in surgical intervention for patients with upper tract urolithiasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The panel performed a comprehensive literature review of novel data up to May 2021. The guidelines were updated and a strength rating was given for each recommendation, graded using the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology.

RESULTS

The choice of surgical intervention depends on stone characteristics, patient anatomy, comorbidities, and choice. For shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), the optimal shock frequency is 1.0-1.5 Hz. For ureteroscopy (URS), a postoperative stent is not needed in uncomplicated cases. Flexible URS is an alternative if percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) or SWL is contraindicated, even for stones >2 cm. For PCNL, prone and supine approaches are equally safe. For uncomplicated PCNL cases, a nephrostomy tube after PCNL is not necessary. Radiation exposure for endourological procedures should follow the as low as reasonably achievable principles.

CONCLUSIONS

This is a summary of the EAU urolithiasis guidelines on best clinical practice in interventional management of urolithiasis. The full guideline is available at https://uroweb.org/guidelines/urolithiasis.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The European Association of Urology has produced guidelines on the best management of kidney stones, which are summarised in this paper. Kidney stone disease is a common condition; computed tomography (CT) is increasingly used to diagnose it. The guidelines aim to decrease radiation exposure to patients by minimising the use of x-rays and CT scans. We detail specific advice around the common operations for kidney stones.

Thermal Injury and Laser Efficiency with Holmium YAG and Thulium Fiber Laser-An In Vitro Study

Objective: To evaluate using an inanimate model the thermal injury and laser efficiency on high frequency, high energy, and its combination in hands of junior and experienced urologists during holmium YAG (Ho:YAG) and Thulium fiber laser (TFL) lithotripsy. Methods: A Cyber: Ho 150 WTM and Fiber Dust TFL (Quanta System) with 200 μm core-diameter laser fibers (LF) were used in a saline in vitro ureteral model. Each participant (five junior and five experienced urologists) performed 32 sessions of 5-minute lasering (125 mm³ phantom BegoStones™), comparing four modes (3 J/5 Hz [1.5 W], 0.3 J/20 Hz [6 W], 1.2 J/5 Hz [6 W], and 1.2 J/20 Hz [24 W]). Transparent tip and cleaved LF, and digital and fiberoptic ureteroscopes were also compared. Ureteral damage was classified in a scale (0-5) according to the burns and holes seen in the ureteral model's surface. Results: High-power (HP) setting (24 W) was associated with higher delivered energy and higher ablation rates (ARs) in both lasers (p < 0.001). For the same power setting (6 W), there was no difference in delivered energy or stone ARs. Regardless the settings, a higher AR was observed with TFL than with Ho:YAG (0.5Δ mg/s ± 0.33 vs 0.39 Δmg/s ± 0.31, p = 0.002) laser. Higher mean AR was found with cleaved tip vs transparent tip (p = 0.03) in TFL. For both lasers, higher ureteral damage was observed in the 24 W group (p = 0.006) and in the junior urologists (p = 0.03). Between 6 W groups, different types of lesions were found and junior urologist have more lesions when high frequency was used, for both Ho:YAG (p = 0.05) and TFL (p = 0.04). Conclusion: More stone ARs and reduced operative time are observed in HP settings; however, more ureteral thermic-related damage is produced. When comparing the same power, higher energy or frequency does not modify the AR. Nonetheless, more ureteral thermic-related thermal damage is observed in high-frequency settings in unexperienced hands.

Factors affecting the irrigation fluid temperature during laser lithotripsy: in vitro experimental study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of the diameter of laser fiber, pelvis volume, presence and type of the stone on irrigation fluid temperature rise.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A 20ml syringe, 12/14 ureteral access sheath(UAS), a dual-lumen catheter and a thermocouple were used.  The 12/14Fr UAS(Cook Ireland Ltd., Limerick, Ireland) and the Thermocouple(SE001, Pico Technologies, Cambridgeshire, UK) were inserted in the syringe. The syringe was closed allowing outflow from the UAS with rate at 10ml/min. The Quanta Ho 150W(Quanta System, Samarate, Italy) laser was used and fired with 10W(2Jx5Hz), 20W(2 × 10 Hz), 40W(2 × 20 Hz), 60W(2 × 30 Hz). These power settings were tested in different conditions: fibers(200µm, 365µm and 550µm), volumes(5ml, 10ml and 20ml) and artificial stones(soft, hard). The laser was activated for 30 seconds and reactivation was performed when the temperature reached below 26 ⁰C.

RESULTS

For all trials 60W of energy resulted in higher temperature rise. No differences were observed when different fibers were used. The highest temperatures (up to 80 ⁰C) for 60W were reported in 5ml syringe and the lowest (<45 ⁰C) with 20ml.  The maximal temperature of >59°C was recorded for the power of 60W(1Jx60Hz). The temperature exceeded 43 ⁰C when power settings >40W were applied.

CONCLUSION

Increasing the overall power, increases the irrigation fluid temperature significantly. The smaller the volume of the pelvis, the greater the temperature elevation. The fiber size did not affect the temperature increase pattern. The presence of artificial stones was associated with the absorption of energy emitted by the laser.

The Effects of Scanning Speed and Standoff Distance of the Fiber on Dusting Efficiency during Short Pulse Holmium: YAG Laser Lithotripsy

To investigate the effects of fiber lateral scanning speed across the stone surface (v_fiber) and fiber standoff distance (SD) on dusting efficiency during short pulse holmium (Ho): YAG laser lithotripsy (LL), pre-soaked BegoStone samples were treated in water using 0.2 J/20 Hz at SD of 0.10~0.50 mm with v_fiber in the range of 0~10 mm/s. Bubble dynamics, pressure transients, and stone damage were analyzed. To differentiate photothermal ablation vs. cavitation damage, experiments were repeated in air, or in water with the fiber tip at 0.25 mm proximity from the ureteroscope end to mitigate cavitation damage. At SD = 0.10 mm, the maximum dusting efficiency was produced at v_fiber = 3.5 mm/s, resulting in long (17.5 mm), shallow (0.15 mm), and narrow (0.4 mm) troughs. In contrast, at SD = 0.50 mm, the maximum efficiency was produced at v_fiber = 0.5 mm/s, with much shorter (2.5 mm), yet deeper (0.35 mm) and wider (1.4 mm), troughs. With the ureteroscope end near the fiber tip, stone damage was significantly reduced in water compared to those produced without the ureteroscope. Under clinically relevant v_fiber (1~3 mm/s), dusting at SD = 0.5 mm that promotes cavitation damage may leverage the higher frequency of the laser (e.g., 40 to 120 Hz) and, thus, significantly reduces the procedure time, compared to at SD = 0.1 mm that promotes photothermal ablation. Dusting efficiency during short pulse Ho: YAG LL may be substantially improved by utilizing an optimal combination of v_fiber, SD, and frequency.

Moses and Moses 2.0 for Laser Lithotripsy: Expectations vs. Reality

Moses technology was born with the aim of controlling the Moses effect present in every single Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy. The capacity to divide the energy pulse into two sub-pulses gained popularity due to the fact that most of the energy would be delivered in the second pulse. However, is this pulse modulation technique really better for endocorporeal laser lithoripsy? A review of the literature was performed and all relevant clinical trials of Moses 1.0 and 2.0, as well as the lab studies of Moses 2.0 carried out up to June 2022 were selected. The search came back with 11 clinical experiences (10 full-text clinical trials and one peer-reviewed abstract) with Moses 1.0 and Moses 2.0, and three laboratory studies (peer-reviewed abstracts) with Moses 2.0 only. The clinical experiences confirmed that the MT (1.0) has a shorter lasing time but lower laser efficacy, because it consumes more J/mm³ when compared with the LP Ho:YAG laser (35 W). This gain in lasing time did not provide enough savings for the medical center. Additionally, in most comparative studies of MT (1.0) vs. the regular mode of the HP Ho:YAG laser, the MT did not have a significant different lasing time, operative time or stone-free rate. Clinical trials with Moses 2.0 are lacking. From what has been published until now, the use of higher frequencies (up to 120 Hz) consumes more total energy and J/mm³ than Moses 1.0 for similar stone-free rates. Given the current evidence that we have, there are no high-quality studies that support the use of HP Ho:YAG lasers with MT over other lasers, such as LP Ho:YAG lasers or TFL lasers.

Contributions to expenditure in endoscopic stone management: a costly process

No comprehensive cost estimates exist for performing ureteropyeloscopy (URS), which is increasingly utilised as a treatment of upper tract urolithiasis in Australia. To estimate expenditure associated with URS in an Australian public hospital setting and determine factors contributing to increased cost. Patients who underwent flexible URS for urolithiasis over a 2-year period at a Victorian public health site were included. Data describing demographics, stone factors, disposable equipment and admission length were retrospectively collected. Procedures were performed using reusable flexible scopes. Previously validated costing models for cystoscopic stent extraction, theatre and recovery per hour and ward admission were used to attach cost to individual episodes. The cost of emergency stent insertion was beyond the scope of this study. 222 patients underwent URS; the combined total number of procedures was 539, comprising 202 stent extractions and 115 stent insertions in addition to 222 URS. Mean procedural cost was $2885 (range $1380-$4900). Mean episode cost excluding emergency stent insertion was $3510 (range $1555-$7140). A combination of flexible scopes, operative time and disposable equipment accounted for nearly 90% of the total procedural cost. Significant cost is associated with URS for treatment of renal and ureteric stones. A large burden of the cost is time in theatre, equipment and the need for multiple associated procedures per episode. Utilising other available treatments such as extracorporeal shockwave therapy (SWL) where appropriate may reduce the financial burden of URS and associated procedures.

The future of laser technology in kidney stones

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to present the recent and promising innovations of the new laser technologies used for the treatment of renal stones.

RECENT FINDINGS

Taking advantage of pulse modulation, new technologies such as the Moses effect, the Virtual basket and the Vapor tunnel have been introduced. These technologies seem to improve lithotripsy efficacy by reducing retropulsion and increasing the stone ablation rate.High-power laser lithotripsy has arisen in everyday clinical practice in some centres. The combination of equal efficacy and safety levels compared with the low-power laser lithotripsy and significantly reduced operative time could explain this trend.Thulium fibre laser is an innovative type of laser-emitting machine that offers a lot of advantages compared with its predecessors. The different mechanism of creating the laser pulse offers new possibilities in laser lithotripsy and perhaps in the future thulium fibre laser could replace Ho:YAG as the golden standard for laser lithotripsy.

SUMMARY

Laser lithotripsy is heavily based on technological equipment. The continuous improvement of available lasers increases the endoscopic lithotripsy levels of efficacy and safety.

A Practical Guide for Intra-Renal Temperature and Pressure Management during Rirs: What Is the Evidence Telling Us

INTRODUCTION

One of the main limitations of Ho:YAG lithotripsy is represented by its advancement speed. The need for faster lithotripsy has led to the introduction of high-power laser equipment. This general trend in increasing Ho:YAG lithotripsy power has certain points that deserve to be considered and analyzed. The objective is to carry out a narrative review on intrarenal temperature and pressure during ureteroscopy.

METHODS

A literature search using PUBMED database from inception to December 2021 was performed. The analysis involved a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Using more power in the laser correlates with an increase in temperature that can be harmful to the kidney. This potential risk can be overcome by increasing either the irrigation inflow or outflow. Increasing irrigant flow can lead to high intrarenal temperature (IRP). The factors that allow the reduction of intrarenal pressure are a low irrigation flow, the use of a ureteral access sheath of adequate diameter according to the equipment used, and the occupation of the working channel by the laser or basket.

CONCLUSION

To maintain a safe temperature profile, it has been proposed to use chilled irrigation fluid, intermittent laser activation or to increase irrigation flow. This last recommendation can lead to increased IRP, which can be overcome by using a UAS. Another option is to use low power laser configurations in order to avoid temperature increases and not require high irrigation flows.

Comparison of low power and high power holmium YAG laser settings in flexible ureteroscopy

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of conventional low power and high power holmium: yttrium aluminum-garnet (Ho: YAG) laser lithotripsy settings during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).  METHODS: The prospective study was conducted in patients undergoing RIRS for renal stones less than 2 cm diameter. Pulsed Ho:YAG laser (Lumenis^® Pulse TM P120 H) was used for laser lithotripsy and the patients were randomized into low power (LP) and high power (HP) laser lithotripsy settings groups. The lasing duration, total laser energy used (Joules), laser energy used to ablate 1 mm³ of stone (Joules/mm³), operative duration, stone ablation speed (mm³/s) and stone free rate were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 120 underwent RIRS with 63 and 57 patients in LP and HP group, respectively. Median stone volume and stone density were comparable between the groups. The total energy used and laser energy used to ablate 1mm³ of stone (Joules/mm³) were significantly higher in the HP group than in LP group (27.9 (16.4-46.2) J/ mm³ vs 9.7 (5.3-17.7) J/ mm³) (p < 0.01). Median (IQR) ablation speed were 0.8 (0.5-1.3) mm³/s and 0.6 (0.4-1) mm³/s in the LP and HP groups, respectively. The median lasing time, operative time and stone free rate were similar in both the groups.

CONCLUSION

The total energy used and J/mm³ were lower in the LP group than in HP group with similar lasing duration, operative duration, ablation speed and stone free rate for renal stones less than 2 cm.

Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital

Introduction:

Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation [flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURSL)] has risen over the last two decades. Laser technology has also evolved over the time, shifting from low- to high-power lasers with the addition of MOSES technology that allows for ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ of stones. The aim of the study was to look at the outcomes of FURSL in lower pole stones (LPS) using low- and high-power lasers.

Patient and Methods:

In this study, we compared the outcomes of low-power holmium laser (group A, 20 W) and high-power holmium laser (group B, including both 60 W MOSES integrated system and 100 W lasers) for all patients with LPS treated with laser lithotripsy. Data were collected for patient demographics, stone location, size, pre- and postoperative stent, length of stay, complications and stone free rate (SFR).

Results:

A total of 284 patients who underwent FURSL procedure for LPS were analysed (168 group A, 116 group B). Outcomes showed that compared with group A, group B had a higher SFR (91.6% versus 96.5%, p = 0.13) and shorter operative time (52 versus 38 min, p < 0.001). The median length of stay was <24 h in all groups (day-case procedures). The complication rate was comparable between the two groups but with more infectious complications (n = 7) noted in group A compared with group B (n = 3) (p = 0.53).

Conclusion:

Compared with low-power laser, the use of high-power laser for LPS significantly reduced the use of ureteral access sheath (UAS), postoperative stent and procedural time. Although non-statistically significant, the SFR was higher in the high-power group even for relatively larger stone sizes, which was also reflected in a reduction of sepsis-related complication rates with these lasers.

The effect of prolonged laser activation on irrigation fluid temperature: an in vitro experimental study

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of prolonged laser activation on irrigation fluid temperature by varying the power settings flow rate (10-30 ml/min).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An experimental study using a 20 ml syringe, 12/14 ureteral access sheath, a dual-lumen catheter and a thermocouple was performed. The laser was fired with 12 W (0.3 J × 40 Hz), 40 W (1 J × 40 Hz), 60 W (1.5 J × 40 Hz) using Quanta Ho 150 W (Quanta System, Samarate, Italy). All trials were performed with fluid outflow rate of 10, 20 and 30 ml/min with the fixed fluid volume at 10 ml.

RESULTS

Continuous laser activation for 10 min with the outflow rate of 10 ml/min using only 12 W resulted to continuous temperature rise to as high as 83 °C. Similar rise of temperatures were observed for 40 W and 60 W with 10 ml/min outflow rate with intermittent laser activation. With 20 and 30 ml/min outflow rates the maximum temperatures for all power settings were below the threshold (< 43 °C). However, the time to reach the same total emitted energy was 60% and 40% shorter 60 W and 40 W, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study found that continuous laser activation with as less as 12 W using 10 ml/min outflow rate increased the irrigation fluid temperature above the threshold only after 1 min. In the current experimental setup, with the fluid outflow rate of 20 and 30 ml/min safe laser activation with 60 W and 40 W (temperature < 43 °C) can be achieved reaching the same total emitted energy as with 12 W in significantly shorter time period.

Generated temperatures and thermal laser damage during upper tract endourological procedures using the holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser: a systematic review of experimental studies

PURPOSE

To perform a review on the latest evidence related to generated temperatures during Ho:YAG laser use, and present different tools to maintain decreased values, and minimize complication rates during endourological procedures.

METHODS

We performed a literature search using PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials-CENTRAL, restricted to original English-written articles, including animal, artificial model, and human studies. Different keywords were URS, RIRS, ureteroscopy, percutaneous, PCNL, and laser.

RESULTS

Thermal dose (t43) is an acceptable tool to assess possible thermal damage using the generated temperature and the time of laser exposure. A t43 value of more than 120 min leads to a high risk of thermal tissue injury and at temperatures higher than 43 °C Ho:YAG laser use becomes hazardous due to an exponentially increased cytotoxic effect. Using open continuous flow, or chilled irrigation, temperatures remain lower than 45 °C. By utilizing high-power (> 40 W) or shorter laser pulse, temperatures rise above the accepted threshold, but adding a ureteral access sheath (UAS) helps to maintain acceptable values.

CONCLUSIONS

Open irrigation systems, chilled irrigation, UASs, laser power < 40 W, and shorter on/off laser activation intervals help to keep intrarenal temperatures at accepted values during URS and PCNL.

Retrograde intrarenal surgery: laser showdown (Ho:YAG vs thulium fiber laser)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) has always been recommended for large stones > 20 mm, using the Ho:YAG laser. The introduction of a new technology in the urological market, the thulium fiber laser (TFL) has revolutionized the endourology world because of its characteristics and significantly shorter laser-on time (LOT) and operative time, without scarifying the champ vision. The aim of this review is to evaluate the most relevant findings of the last 2 years of each laser technology, confronting Ho:YAG vs TFL, analyzing who is more suitable for performing an efficient RIRS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Five full clinical trials using TFL for RIRS were found. Median LOT was between 2.8 and 34 min. All stones were similar in terms of stone volume, >500 mm3, and stone density, > 800 HU. Low complication rate, mostly Clavien-Dindo grade I and II and not related to the laser itself. One clinical trial only analyzed the efficacy of TFL for > 20 mm renal stones.

SUMMARY

Based on this review, TFL performs a more efficient RIRS than the Ho:YAG laser with similar safety.

Laser Fiber Displacement Velocity during Tm-Fiber and Ho:YAG Laser Lithotripsy: Introducing the Concept of Optimal Displacement Velocity

BACKGROUND

Endocorporeal laser lithotripsy (EL) during flexible ureteroscopy (URS-f) often uses "dusting" settings with "painting" technique. The displacement velocity of the laser fiber (LF) at the stone surface remains unknown and could improve EL's ablation rates. This in vitro study aimed to define the optimal displacement velocity (ODV) for both holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (Tm-Fiber).

METHODS

A 50W-TFL (IRE Polus^®, Moscow, Russia) and a 30W-MH1-Ho:YAG laser (Rocamed^®, Signes, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France), were used with 272 µm-Core-Diameter LF (Sureflex, Boston Scientific^©, San Jose, CA, USA), comparing three TFL modes, "fine dusting" (FD: 0.05-0.15 J/100-600 Hz); "dusting" (D: 0.5 J/30-60 Hz); "fragmentation" (Fr: 1 J/15-30 Hz) and two Ho:YAG modes (D: 0.5 J/20 Hz, Fr: 1 J/15 Hz). An experimental setup consisting of immerged cubes of calcium oxalate monohydrate (COM) stone phantoms (Begostone Plus, Bego^©, Lincoln, RI, USA) was used with a 2 s' laser operation time. LF were in contact with the stones, static or with a displacement of 5, 10 or 20 mm. Experiments were repeated four times. Stones were dried and µ-scanned. Ablation volumes (mm³) were measured by 3D-segmentation.

RESULTS

ODV was higher in dusting compared to fragmentation mode during Ho:YAG lithotripsy (10 mm/s vs. 5 mm/s, respectively). With Tm-Fiber, dusting and fragmentation OVDs were similar (5 mm/s). Tm-Fiber ODV was lower than Ho:YAGs in dusting settings (5 mm/s vs. 10 mm/s, respectively). Without LF displacement, ablation volumes were at least two-fold higher with Tm-Fiber compared to Ho:YAG. Despite the LF-DV, we report a 1.5 to 5-fold higher ablation volume with Tm-Fiber compared to Ho:YAG.

CONCLUSIONS

In dusting mode, the ODV^Tm-Fiber is lower compared to ODV^Ho:YAG, translating to a potential easier Tm-Fiber utilization for "painting" dusting technique. The ODV determinants remain unknown. Dynamic ablation volumes are higher to static ones, regardless of the laser source, settings or LF displacement velocity.

Reply letter to: Majdalany SE, Levin BA, Ghani KR. The Efficiency of Moses Technology Holmium Laser for Treating Renal Stones

Reply letter.

The Efficiency of Moses Technology Holmium Laser for Treating Renal Stones During Flexible Ureteroscopy: Relationship Between Stone Volume, Time, and Energy

Introduction: There are limited data on how stone factors relate to flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) laser lithotripsy efficiency and outcomes when using the Moses Technology Ho:YAG system. We examined the relationship of stone volume and density to lithotripsy, lasing times, and energy used to treat a single renal stone. We also assessed short-term clinical outcomes. Methods: We analyzed patients undergoing f-URS by a single surgeon using high-power Moses Technology Ho:YAG system (Lumenis). We only included cases with a CT confirming a solitary renal stone. Ureteral stones, staged and bilateral procedures were excluded. Stone dimensions and HU were obtained. Volume (mm³) was calculated using European Association of Urology criteria. Laser energy (J), lithotripsy, and lasing times were obtained. Laser activity was calculated by dividing lasing time by lithotripsy time. Relationships between time, stone density, volume, and energy were assessed using Spearman correlation. Complications were assessed using Clavien-Dindo grade. Residual fragments (RF) were determined on imaging within 3 months. Results: Twenty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean (range) stone volume and density were 290 mm³ (42-1700) and 814 HU (170-1675), respectively. Mean lithotripsy and lasing times were 11.9 (3.6-26.0) and 6.0 (0.6-19.6) minutes, respectively. Mean laser activity was 47%. Mean fragmentation speed was 0.9 mm³/s. Mean energy used per unit stone volume was 38.2 J/mm³. Time taken to perform fragmentation had a stronger association with the stone volume vs stone density. Three (10.3%) and 2 (6.9%) patients had a Clavien Grade 1 and 2 complications, respectively. At follow-up the zero-fragment rate was 79.3%. Conclusions: When using the Moses Technology laser to ablate a single renal stone with f-URS, the fragmentation speed was ∼1 mm³/s. Stone volume, not density was correlated to lasing time. We propose mm³/s be considered a measure that has implications for technique efficiency and comparing laser platforms.

Outcomes of Ureteroscopy and Laser Stone Fragmentation (URSL) for Kidney Stone Disease (KSD): Comparative Cohort Study Using MOSES Technology 60 W Laser System versus Regular Holmium 20 W Laser

Background: For ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL), the use of laser technology has shifted from low power to higher power lasers and the addition of Moses technology, that allows for ‘fragmentation, dusting and pop-dusting’ of stones. We wanted to compare the outcomes of URSL for Moses technology 60 W laser system versus matched regular Holmium 20 W laser cases. Methods: Prospective data were collected for patients who underwent URSL using a Moses 60 W laser (Group A) and matched to historical control data using a regular Holmium 20 W laser (Group B), performed by a single surgeon. Data were collected for patient demographics, stone location, size, pre- and post-operative stent, operative time, length of stay, complications and stone free rate (SFR). Results: A total of 38 patients in each group underwent the URSL procedure. The stones were matched for their location (17 renal and 11 ureteric stones). The mean single and cumulative stone sizes (mm) were 10.9 ± 4.4 and 15.5 ± 9.9, and 11.8 ± 4.0 and 16.5 ± 11.3 for groups A and B, respectively. The mean operative time (min) was 51.6 ± 17.1 and 82.1 ± 27.0 (p ≤ 0.0001) for groups A and B. The initial SFR was 97.3% and 81.6% for groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.05), with 1 and 7 patients in each group needing a second procedure (p = 0.05), for a final SFR of 100% and 97.3%. While there were 2 and 5 Clavien I/II complications for groups A and B, none of the patients in group A had any infection related complication. Conclusions: Use of Moses technology with higher power was significantly faster for stone lithotripsy and reduced operative time and the number of patients who needed a second procedure to achieve a stone free status. It seems that the use of Moses technology with a mid-power laser is likely to set a new benchmark for treating complex stones, without the need for secondary procedures in most patients.