In Vitro Dusting Performance of a New Solid State Thulium Laser Compared to Holmium Laser Lithotripsy

[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.

Advances in lasers for the minimally invasive treatment of upper and lower urinary tract conditions: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Technological advancements in laser lithotripsy are expanding into numerous fields of urology, like ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and benign and malignant soft-tissue treatments. Since the amount of research regarding lasers in urology has grown exponentially, we present a systematic review of the most recent and relevant advances encompassing all lasers used in urological endoscopic treatment.

METHODS

We performed a literature search using PubMed (May 2023) to obtain information about lasers for urological purposes. We included only recent data from published articles between 2021 and 2023 or articles ahead of print.

RESULTS

Lasers are widely used in lithotripsy for ureteric, renal, and bladder stones, benign prostate surgery, and bladder and upper tract tumor ablation. While the holmium (Ho:YAG) laser is still predominant, there seems to be more emphasis on pulse modulation and newer lasers such as thulium fiber laser (TFL) and pulsed Tm:YAG laser.

CONCLUSION

The use of lasers and related technological innovations have shown increasing versatility, and over time have proven to be invaluable in the management of stone lithotripsy, treatment of benign and malignant prostate diseases, and urothelial tumors. Laser endoscopic treatment is heavily based on technological nuances, and it is essential to know at least the basics of these technologies. Ultimately the choice of laser used depends on its availability, cost, surgeon experience and expertise.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.

Could retrograde intrarenal surgery be a safe and effective alternative to mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy ın the management of relatively large (20-30 mm) stones? A critical evaluation

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in patients with renal stones sizing 2-3 cm.

METHODS

A total of 566 patients from 6 institutions who underwent mPCNL (n = 440) and RIRS (n = 126) procedures were enrolled in our study. The retrospective patient cohort was reviewed and compared. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors predicting success in the RIRS group.

RESULTS

The stone-free rates were 91.1 and 77% for the mPCNL and RIRS groups, respectively (p < 0.001). The auxiliary procedure rates were 4.5 and 39.7% in the mPCNL and RIRS groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Mean values of hemoglobin decrease, fluoroscopy time, and hospitalization time were significantly higher in the mPCNL group (p < 0.001). While the Clavien grade 1-2 complication rates were 10.9 and 34.1% (p < 0.001) in two groups, these values were 2.7 and 1.6% (p = 0.539), respectively, for Clavien grade 3-4 complication rates. Although three patients in the mPCNL group received blood transfusions, none of the patients in the RIRS groups were transfused. The stone location and stone density parameters were found to be the independent predictive factors for RIRS success.

CONCLUSIONS

mPCNL provided a higher stone-free rate, less need for the auxiliary procedure, and lower complication rates compared to RIRS in patients with 2-3 cm stones. Blood loss, radiation exposure, and a hospital stay of mPCNL can be significantly reduced with the RIRS technique in selected patients.

Can We Identify Patients in Danger of Complications in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery?-A Retrospective Risk Factors Analysis

Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is an innovative and effective method of kidney stones treatment, as it had great influence on the development of endoscopy in urology. The increasing prevalence of urolithiasis together with the rapid development of endourology leads to a rise in the number of procedures related to the disease. Flexible ureteroscopy is constantly being improved, especially regarding the effectiveness and safety of the procedure. The purpose of this study is to evaluate intraoperative and early post-operative complications of RIRS in the treatment of kidney stones. A retrospective analysis of medical records was performed. A series was comprised of 207 consecutive operations performed from 2017 to 2020. Complications occurred in 19.3% (n = 40) of patients. Occurrence according to the Clavien-Dindo scale was: 11.1% for grade I, 5.8% for grade II and 2.4% for grade IV. Infectious complications included SIRS (5.3%, n = 11) and sepsis (2.4%, n = 5). Statistical analysis revealed a correlation between acute post-operative infections and positive midstream urine culture, history of chronic or recurrent urinary tract infections, and increased body mass index (BMI). Furthermore, a significant correlation was observed between pain requiring the use of opioids with BMI over 25. Consequently, history of urinary tract infections, positive pre-operative urine culture, and increased BMI are considered risk factors and require appropriate management.

In vitro fragmentation performance of a novel, pulsed Thulium solid-state laser compared to a Thulium fibre laser and standard Ho:YAG laser

The aim of this work was to compare the fragmentation efficiency of a novel, pulsed Thulium solid-state laser (p-Tm:YAG) to that of a chopped Thulium fibre laser (TFL) and a pulsed Holmium solid-state laser (Ho:YAG). During the fragmentation process, we used a silicone mould to fixate the hemispherical stone models under water in a jar filled with room-temperature water. Each laser device registered the total energy applied to the stone model to determine fragmentation efficiency. Our study examined laser settings with single pulse energies ranging from 0.6 to 6 J and pulse frequencies ranging from 5 to 15 Hz. Similar laser settings were applied to explicitly compare the fragmentation efficiency of all three devices. We experimented with additional laser settings to see which of the three devices would perform best. The fragmentation performance of the three laser devices differed statistically significantly (p < 0.05). The average total energy required to fragment the stone model was 345.96 J for Ho:YAG, 372.43 J for p-Tm:YAG and 483.90 J for TFL. To fragment the stone models, both Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG needed similar total energy (p = 0.97). TFL’s fragmentation efficiency is significantly lower than that of Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG. Furthermore, we found the novel p-Tm:YAG’s fragmentation efficiency to closely resemble that of Ho:YAG. The fragmentation efficiency is thought to be influenced by the pulse duration. TFL’s shortest possible pulse duration was considerably longer than that of Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG, resulting in Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG exhibiting better fragmenting efficiency.

Dusting Efficiency of a Novel Pulsed Thulium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Laser vs a Thulium Fiber Laser

Background: Holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser (Ho:YAG) is still considered the gold standard in laser lithotripsy. There is a large body of literature comparing the capabilities of Ho:YAG and thulium fiber lasers (TFLs). The novel, pulsed thulium:yttrium aluminum garnet laser (p-Tm:YAG) evaluation model has only been compared with Ho:YAG in terms of its dusting performance to date. It was this study's aim to compare the p-Tm:YAG's dusting efficiency with that of a chopped TFL. Materials and Methods: During the laser ablation procedure, while the laser device was emitting light, the laser fiber was spiraled across the surface of a uniform kidney stone model via software. We relied on the stone model's difference in weight before and after the dusting procedure to assess the dusting efficiency and assessed each laser device's dusting efficiency at various preset laser configurations and laser fiber-motion speeds. We compared both laser devices' laser configurations, which were identical in pulse energy and frequency, while keeping in mind that the pulse duration differed significantly. In addition, we tested each laser device's capability. Results: The average ablated weight across all laser configurations was 0.61 g (standard deviation [SD] = 0.44 g) for p-Tm:YAG and 0.76 g (SD = 0.51 g) for TFL. After statistical analysis, we found no significant difference in ablated weight between the laser devices (U = 1715.5, p-value = 0.11). The maximum permissible frequency configuration for TFL was 1600 Hz, which resulted in the worst overall dusting output. Conclusions: We observed that the p-Tm:YAG's dusting efficiency resembled that of TFL in the identical pulse energy and frequency laser configurations. The ablation efficiency did not seem to be affected by the laser devices' differences in pulse duration. Slower laser fiber-motion speeds resulted in more efficient ablation. When using the maximum preset frequency and power configuration, TFL's dusting efficiency appeared to be inefficient.

[Innovative laser technologies in the treatment of urolithiasis : A change to more gentle methods with increased patient safety]

Management of urolithiasis has undergone fundamental changes with the introduction of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and percutaneous and ureterorenoscopic techniques in the 1980s. Since then, these minimally invasive techniques have been continuously optimized and specific laser techniques for stone disintegration have emerged. Besides the established holmium laser, other types of lasers are also emerging. Especially the thulium fiber laser is the subject of promising research due to its variable adjustment options. In terms of patient safety, both holmium and thulium techniques seem to be similar . While serious direct physical lesions are rare, there is increasing evidence of clinically relevant secondary thermal injury due to increased temperatures in the upper urinary tract during treatment. Our research group has recently demonstrated in both in vitro and in vivo (porcine animal model) experiments that monitoring the fluorescence spectra of calculi allows precise target differentiation between stone, tissue, and endoscope components. Consequently, pulse emissions were only emitted when stone material was detected. We believe that target monitoring will minimize the risk of laser-induced urothelial damage and decrease energy release into the upper urinary tract allowing adequate temperature management.