Comparison of Holmium:YAG and Thulium Fiber Lasers on the Risk of Laser Fiber Fracture

Is "Kidney Stone Calculator" efficient in predicting ureteroscopic lithotripsy duration? A holmium:YAG and thulium fiber lasers comparative analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the ability of Kidney Stone Calculator (KSC), a flexible ureteroscopy surgical planning software, to predict the lithotripsy duration with both holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (TFL).

METHODS

A multicenter prospective study was conducted from January 2020 to April 2023. Patients with kidney or ureteral stones confirmed at non-contrast computed tomography and treated by flexible ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy were enrolled. "Kidney Stone Calculator" provided stone volume and subsequent lithotripsy duration estimation using three-dimensional segmentation of the stone on computed tomography and the graphical user interface for laser settings. The primary endpoint was the quantitative and qualitative comparison between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations. Secondary endpoints included subgroup analysis (Ho:YAG-TFL) of differences between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations and intraoperative outcomes. Multivariate analysis assessed the association between pre- and intraoperative variables and these differences according to laser source.

RESULTS

89 patients were included in this study, 43 and 46 in Ho:YAG and TFL groups, respectively. No significant difference was found between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations (27.37 vs 28.36 min, p = 0.43) with a significant correlation (r =  + 0.89, p < 0.001). Among groups, this difference did not differ (p = 0.68 and 0.07, respectively), with a higher correlation between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations for TFL compared to Ho:YAG (r =  + 0.95, p < 0.001 vs r =  + 0.81, p < 0.001, respectively). At multivariate analysis, the difference was correlated with preoperative (volume > 2000 mm3 (Ho:YAG), 500-750 mm3 SV and calyceal diverticulum (TFL)), operative (fragmentation setting (p > 0.001), and basket utilization (p = 0.05) (Ho:YAG)) variables.

CONCLUSION

KSC is a reliable tool for predicting the lithotripsy duration estimation during flexible ureteroscopy for both Ho:YAG and TFL. However, some variables not including laser source may lead to underestimating this estimation.

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.

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.

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.

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 [...].

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.

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.

Thulium fiber laser lithotripsy: Is it living up to the Hype?

Objective

The holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser (Ho:YAG) has been the gold standard for laser lithotripsy over the last three decades. After demonstrating good in vitro efficacy, the thulium fiber laser (TFL) has been recently released in the market and the initial clinical results are encouraging. This article aims to review the main technology differences between the Ho:YAG laser and the TFL, discuss the initial clinical results with the TFL as well as the optimal settings for TFL lithotripsy.

Methods

We reviewed the literature focusing on the technological aspects of the Ho:YAG laser and TFL as well as the results of in vitro and in vivo studies comparing both technologies.

Results

In vitro studies show a technical superiority of TFL compared to the Ho:YAG laser and encouraging results have been demonstrated in clinical practice. However, as TFL is a new technology, limited studies are currently available, and the optimal settings for lithotripsy are not yet established.

Conclusion

TFL has the potential to be an alternative to the Ho:YAG laser, but more reports are still needed to determine the optimal laser for lithotripsy of urinary tract stones when considering all parameters including effectiveness, safety, and costs.

Effect of Bending of Carbon Dioxide Laser Fibers on Power Output

Objective

The power output from carbon dioxide (CO₂) laser fibers has the potential to be diminished if there are any bends along its course, which may alter the effect the laser has on the target tissue. In this study, we assess how bending of CO₂ laser flexible fiber assemblies affects the energy output measured at the end of the fiber.

Study Design

Laboratory study.

Setting

Laboratory.

Methods

Eight separate flexible fibers were tested—4 were of a type commonly used in endoscopic airway procedures, and the other 4 were a type used in otologic surgery. Fibers were bent in various configurations, and the power output of a CO₂ laser fired through the bent fiber was measured. The output through the bent fiber was normalized to the output with a straight fiber. Correlations between bend parameters and power outputs was tested using Spearman’s correlation coefficient.

Results

For the airway fibers, there was a weak trend toward increasing energy outputs with greater radius of curvature (P = .714) and a negative correlation between the energy output and arc of rotation (P = .043). For the otologic fibers, there was a trend toward increasing energy outputs with greater radius (P = .084) and a strong negative correlation between the energy output and the arc of rotation (P = .006).

Conclusion

CO₂ laser energy output is reduced by bending of the laser fiber assembly. When using the CO₂ laser fiber, surgeons should be aware of any bends in the fiber and are encouraged to take measures to minimize bending.

Special Issue 'Minimally Invasive Urological Procedures and Related Technological Developments'

The landscape of minimally invasive urological intervention is changing [...].