Gas Bubble Anatomy During Laser Lithotripsy: An Experimental In Vitro Study of a Pulsed Solid-State Tm:YAG and Ho:YAG Device

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.

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.

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.

Experimental ex-vivo performance study comparing a novel, pulsed thulium solid-state laser, chopped thulium fibre laser, low and high-power holmium:YAG laser for endoscopic enucleation of the prostate

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the enucleation performances of four different types of laser devices in an ex-vivo experiment: a novel, pulsed Tm:YAG solid-state laser evaluation model (p-Tm:YAG), chopped thulium fibre laser (TFL), low-power Ho:YAG laser (LP-Ho:YAG), and a high-power Ho:YAG laser (HP-Ho:YAG).

Methods

Our primary aim was to endoscopically separate the fascial layers of a porcine belly using laser fibres within a time period of 60 s. The size of a “tissue pocket” was assessed numerically. The enucleation characteristics reflecting the surgeon’s experience were evaluated via the NASA Task Load Index (TLX) questionnaire and a questionnaire based on Likert scale.

Results

HP-Ho:YAG achieved with the available laser settings the largest overall “tissue pocket” (31.5 cm²) followed by p-Tm:YAG (15 cm²), TFL (12 cm²), and LP-Ho:YAG (6 cm²). The coagulation performances of p-Tm:YAG and TFL were rated the best. In the performance evaluation by the Likert questionnaire, HP-Ho:YAG (average score of 4.06) was rated highest, followed by p-Tm:YAG (3.94), TFL (3.38), and LP-Ho:YAG (3.25). The evaluation of the NASA-TLX performance questionnaire revealed average scores for HP-Ho:YAG, LP-Ho:YAG, TFL and p-Tm:YAG of 4.38, 4.09, 3.92 and 3.90, respectively.

Conclusion

We are the first to compare different laser devices and settings in an ex-vivo study. We found that the surgeons were most satisfied with the HP-Ho:YAG laser device, followed by the p-Tm:YAG. These findings could be highly relevant for future research and for the practical utilisation of laser systems in endourology.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-021-03825-z.