Managing Urolithiasis with Thulium Fiber Laser: Updated Real-Life Results-A Systematic Review

Optimal parameter settings of thulium fiber laser for ureteral stone lithotripsy: a comparative study in two different testing environments

This study aims to identify optimal parameters for using Thulium fiber lasers (TFL) in ureteral stone lithotripsy to ensure laser safety and maximize efficacy. Our goal is to improve the outcomes of single-use semi-rigid ureteroscopy for treating stones located in the proximal ureter. A clinically relevant thermal testing device was designed to investigate heating effects during TFL stone fragmentation. The device was utilized to identify safe power thresholds for TFL at various irrigation rates. Three other devices were used to assess varying pulse energy effects on stone fragmentation efficiency, dusting, retropulsion, and depth of tissue vaporization. Comparative experiments in fresh porcine renal units were performed to validate the efficacy and safety of optimal TFL parameters for semi-rigid ureteroscopy in proximal ureteral stone procedures. Our study found that the improved device generated a higher thermal effect. Furthermore, the safe power threshold for laser lithotripsy increased as the irrigation rate was raised. At an irrigation rate of 40 ml/min, it is safe to use an average power of less than 30 watts. Although increasing pulse energy has a progressively lower effect on fragmentation and dust removal efficiency, it did lead to a linear increase in stone displacement and tissue vaporization depth. Thermal testing showed 20 W (53.87 ± 2.67 °C) indicating potential urothelial damage. In our study of laser lithotripsy for proximal ureteral stones, the group treated with 0.3 J pulses had several advantages compared to the 0.8 J group: Fewer large fragments (> 4 mm): 0 vs. 1.67 fragments (1-2.25), p = 0.002, a lower number of collateral tissue injuries: 0.50 (0-1.25) vs. 2.67 (2-4), p = 0.011, and lower stone retropulsion grading: 0.83 (0.75-1) vs. 1.67 (1-2), p = 0.046. There was no significant difference in operating time between the groups (443.33 ± 78.30 s vs. 463.17 ± 75.15 s, p = 0.664). These findings suggest that TFL irradiation generates a greater thermal effect compared to non-irradiated stones. Furthermore, the thermal effect during laser lithotripsy is influenced by both power and irrigation flow rate. Our study suggests that using a power below 15 W with an irrigation flow rate of 20 ml/min is safe. Moreover, a pulse energy of 0.3 J appears to be optimal for achieving the best overall stone fragmentation effect.

Comparison of Thulium Fiber Laser versus Holmium laser in ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a Meta-analysis and systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser (TFL) to holmium: YAG (Ho: YAG) laser in ureteroscopic lithotripsy for urolithiasis.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CENTRAL, SinoMed, CNKI database, VIP and Wanfang Database were systematically searched for all relevant clinical trials until September 2023. References were explored to identify the relevant articles. Meta-analysis was carried out for the retrieved studies using RevMan5.4.1 software, and the risk ratio, mean difference and 95% confidence interval were expressed. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The main outcomes of this meta-analysis were stone-free rate (SFR), perioperative outcomes and intraoperative or postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, including 1394 patients, were included. According to the results of pooled analysis, TFL was associated with significantly higher stone-free rate (SFR) [0.52, 95% CI (0.32, 0.85), P = 0.009], shorter operation time [-5.47, 95% CI (-8.86, -2.08), P = 0.002], and less stone migration [0.17, 95% CI (0.06, 0.50), P = 0.001]. However, there was no significant difference in terms of the laser time, duration of hospital stay, drop of hemoglobin level, total energy, postoperative ureteral stenting, the incidence of intraoperative complications or postoperative complications between TFL and Ho: YAGs.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study demonstrated several advantages of TFL in terms of higher SFR, shorter operative time and less stone migration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol of this systematic review was listed in PROSPERO ( www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO ) (Protocol number: CRD42022362550).

Simultaneously combining a thulium fiber laser and holmium:YAG laser in vacuum-assisted mini-endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery on a complex renal calculus: A case report

Employing percutaneous nephrolithotomy to manage a complex renal calculus has always been challenging due to the blood transfusion requirement and the frequent necessity of using multiple access tracts. We report a novel treatment modality in the case of a 65-year-old male with a complex, large-volume renal calculus who was successfully treated by vacuum-assisted miniaturized endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery using the combination of a thulium fiber laser in retrograde fashion with a holmium:YAG laser in antegrade fashion. The kidney stone was entirely cleared, and the patient fully recovered with no adverse event.

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.

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.

Application of tip-bendable ureteral access sheath in flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy: an initial experience of 224 cases

INTRODUCTION

During the last decades, the advent of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy has revolutionized the management of upper urinary tract stones. We designed a patented tip-bendable ureteral access sheath to facilitate stone clearance. Our current study reported our initial experience of 224 cases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study is a descriptive, retrospective analysis. The initial 224 cases, operated consecutively by one surgeon during 16 months, were reviewed. The novel tip-bendable ureteral access sheath was applied in the procedure. Demographics, laboratory tests, and peri- and postoperative findings (operation duration, stone-free rate (SFR), utilization of flexible instruments and complications) were analyzed.

RESUTLS

The median age of the patients was 56 years and the mean stones size was 2.3 ± 1.3 cm. There were 63 cases of upper ureteral stone, 93cases of renal stone and 68 cases of ureteral-renal stones. The mean operative time was 69.2 ± 65.2 min. The immediate stone-free rate was 76.8% and the 1 month post-operative stone-free rate was 97.3%. Most cases(95.5%)were success in single session. Two patient experienced post-operative fever. There was no unplanned readmission. The frequency of post-operative complications was estimated at 0.89% (Clavien I).

CONCLUSION

Flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy with tip-bendable ureteral access sheath is a safe and effective procedure, which can achieve excellent stone clearance.

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 [...].

A Feasibility Study on Clinical Utility, Efficacy and Limitations of 2 Types of Flexible and Navigable Suction Ureteral Access Sheaths in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Renal Stones

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate stone-free rate, device maneuverability, and complications after retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) using 2 different sizes of flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed for patients who underwent RIRS for renal stones of any size, number, and location between November 2021 and October 2022. Group 1 had FANS of 12 French. Group 2 had FANS of 10 French. Both sheaths have a Y-shaped suction channel. Tip of 10 French FANS has 20% more flexibility. Lithotripsy was achieved using either thulium fiber or high-power holmium lasers. A 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the performance of each sheath.

RESULTS

There were 16 patients in Group 1 and 15 patients in Group 2. Baseline demographics and stone parameters were similar. Four patients in Group 2 had the same session bilateral RIRS. Sheath insertion was successful in all renal units but one. Ten French FANS had a higher percentage of excellent scores for ease of use, manipulation, and visibility. Neither of the sheaths had an average or difficult rating for all evaluation scales. A fornix rupture requiring prolonged stenting occurred in group 2. All patients were discharged within 24 hours of surgery. One patient in each group visited the emergency department (analgesic treatment). There were no infectious complications. At 3 months, a computed tomography scan showed that the absence of residual fragments >2 mm was significantly higher in Group 2 (94.7% vs 68.8%, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The 10 Fr FANS showed a higher stone-free rate. There was no infectious complication using both sheaths.

A multicentric non-randomized prospective observational study on the clinical efficiency of thulium fibre laser in large volume stones (> 1000 mm3)

PURPOSE

Our objective was to analyse the clinical efficiency of TFL in large volume stones during retrograde intrarenal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with large volume renal stones (> 1000 mm3) operated at two different centres, from May 2020 to April 2021, were enrolled in this study. Retrograde intrarenal surgery was performed using 60W Superpulse thulium fibre laser™ (IPG Photonics, Russia). Demographic data, stone parameters, laser time, and total operating time were recorded, and laser efficacy (J/mm3) and ablation speed (mm3/s) were calculated. NCCT KUB was done at 3 months postoperatively to calculate stone-free rate.

RESULTS

A total of 76 patients were included and analysed in the study. Mean stone volume was 1753.12 ± 1245.81 (1169.27-2193.25) mm3, mean stone density was 1104.46 ± 313.09 (875.00-1317.00) HU, mean laser time was 537.79 ± 689.89 (21.00-1080.00) sec, mean operating time was 43.38 ± 12.96 (35.00-51.25) min, mean laser efficacy was 20.30 ± 15.5 (8.88-25.57) J/mm3, and mean ablation speed was 1.32 ± 0.7 (0.82-1.64) mm3/sec. A strong positive correlation was found between the stone volume and ablation speed (r = 0.659, p = 0.000), and a moderate negative correlation was found between the stone volume and laser efficacy (J/mm3) (r = - 0.392, p = 0.000). With increasing volume of the stone, J/mm3 decreased significantly and ablation speed increased significantly (p < 0.001). Complications occurred in 21.05% (16/76) patients, most of which were Clavien grades 1-2. Overall SFR is 96.05%.

CONCLUSION

Laser efficiency increases at higher stone volumes (> 1000 mm3), as less energy is required to ablate every mm3 of stone.

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.

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.

Long-term follow-up on dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy: a prospective multicenter trial from the EDGE Research Consortium

In 2018, the Endourology Disease Group for Excellence (EDGE) published a prospective trial comparing dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy. One hundred fifty-nine patients were included in the original analysis, which found no difference in stone-free rate at 3 months. We report the intermediate and long-term outcomes of patients included in the original trial. Two analyses were performed. At 1-year, a retrospective chart review was performed, and data collected on stone episodes, Emergency Department (ED) visits, hospital admissions and surgical interventions. To obtain long-term outcomes, the four sites with the largest initial accrual were included in a second phase of data collection with updated analyses. The patients from those sites were contacted, re-consented, and data were collected on stone surgical interventions, stone episodes, stone recurrences on imaging, emergency department (ED) visits, and hospital admissions for stone-related care since their original procedure. One-year follow-up data were collected in 111 of the original 159 (69.8%) patients from the nine sites. There were no statistically significant differences in the number of painful episodes, ED visits, hospital admissions, or surgical interventions. 94 patients from four sites were included in the long-term analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in surgical interventions, painful stone episodes, stone recurrence on imaging, ED visits or hospitalizations for stone-related events between the two groups. Long-term outcomes of dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy indicate that there are no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two surgical modalities.

Unfavorable factors in accessing the pelvicalyceal system during retrograde flexible ureteroscopy (fURS)

Flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) is a well-established procedure for treating multiple upper-urinary tract pathologies, particularly renoureteral lithiasis. Endoscopes have undergone significant advancements, including miniaturization, improved optics, and increased maneuverability. In addition, advancements in accessory instruments, such as the performance of laser fibers, guidewires, and extraction probes, have played a significant role in improving the overall performance of flexible ureteroscopy procedures. However, despite these advancements, unique circumstances can make achieving optimum results during flexible ureteroscopy challenging. These include congenital renal anomalies (horseshoe kidneys, ectopic kidneys, rotation anomalies), as well as the unique intrarenal anatomy (infundibulopelvic angle, infundibular length) or the specifications of the endoscope in terms of maneuverability (active and passive deflection). This review explored challenging scenarios during flexible ureteroscopy procedures in the pyelocaliceal system.

International Alliance of Urolithiasis guideline on retrograde intrarenal surgery

OBJECTIVES

To set out the second in a series of guidelines on the treatment of urolithiasis by the International Alliance of Urolithiasis that concerns retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), with the aim of providing a clinical framework for urologists performing RIRS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After a comprehensive search of RIRS-related literature published between 1 January 1964 and 1 October 2021 from the PubMed database, systematic review and assessment were performed to inform a series of recommendations, which were graded using modified GRADE methodology. Additionally, quality of evidence was classified using a modification of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence system. Finally, related comments were provided.

RESULTS

A total of 36 recommendations were developed and graded that covered the following topics: indications and contraindications; preoperative imaging; preoperative ureteric stenting; preoperative medications; peri-operative antibiotics; management of antithrombotic therapy; anaesthesia; patient positioning; equipment; lithotripsy; exit strategy; and complications.

CONCLUSION

The series of recommendations regarding RIRS, along with the related commentary and supporting documentation, offered here should help provide safe and effective performance of RIRS.

Laser Efficiency and Laser Safety: Holmium YAG vs. Thulium Fiber Laser

(1) Objective: To support the efficacy and safety of a range of thulium fiber laser (TFL) pre-set parameters for laser lithotripsy: the efficiency is compared against the Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) laser in the hands of juniors and experienced urologists using an in vitro ureteral model; the ureteral damage of both lasers is evaluated in an in vivo porcine model. (2) Materials and Methods: Ho:YAG laser technology and TFL technology, with a 200 µm core-diameter laser fibers in an in vitro saline ureteral model were used. Each participant performed 12 laser sessions. Each session included a 3-min lasering of stone phantoms (Begostone) with each laser technology in six different pre-settings retained from the Coloplast TFL Drive user interface pre-settings, for stone dusting: 0.5 J/10 Hz, 0.5 J/20 Hz, 0.7 J/10 Hz, 0.7 J/20 Hz, 1 J/12 Hz and 1 J/20 Hz. Both lasers were also used in three in vivo porcine models, lasering up to 20 W and 12 W in the renal pelvis and the ureter, respectively. Temperature was continuously recorded. After 3 weeks, a second look was done to verify the integrity of the ureters and kidney and an anatomopathological analysis was performed. (3) Results: Regarding laser lithotripsy efficiency, after 3 min of continuous lasering, the overall ablation rate (AR) percentage was 27% greater with the TFL technology (p < 0.0001). The energy per ablated mass [J/mg] was 24% lower when using the TFL (p < 0.0001). While junior urologists performed worse than seniors in all tests, they performed better when using the TFL than Ho:YAG technology (36% more AR and 36% fewer J/mg). In the in vivo porcine model, no urothelial damage was observed for both laser technologies, neither endoscopically during lasering, three weeks later, nor in the pathological test. (4) Conclusions: By using Coloplast TFL Drive GUI pre-set, TFL lithotripsy efficiency is higher than Ho:YAG laser, even in unexperienced hands. Concerning urothelial damage, both laser technologies with low power present no lesions.

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.

Ureteral Access Sheaths and Its Use in the Future: A Comprehensive Update Based on a Literature Review

Ureteral access sheaths (UASs) are part of urologist’s armamentarium when performing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Recently, the world of RIRS has changed dramatically with the development of three game-changers: thulium fiber laser (TFL), smaller size single use digital flexible ureterosopes and intraoperative intrarenal pressure (IRP) measurement devices. We aimed to clarify the impact of UASs on IRP, complications and SFRs and put its indications in perspective of these three major technological improvements. A systematic review of the literature using the Medline, Scopus and Web of Science databases was performed by two authors and relevant studies were selected according to PRISMA guidelines. Recent studies showed that using a UAS lowers IRP and intrarenal temperature by increasing irrigation outflow during RIRS. Data on the impact of a UAS on SFRs, postoperative pain, risk of infectious complications, risk of ureteral strictures and risk of bladder recurrence of urothelial carcinoma after diagnostic RIRS were inconclusive. Prestenting for at least one week resulted in ureteral enlargement, while the influence of pre-operative administration of alpha-blockers was unclear. Since TFL, smaller single use digital ureteroscopes and devices with integrated pressure-measuring and aspiration technology seemed to increase SFRs and decrease pressure and temperature related complications, indications on the use of a UAS may decrease in the near future.

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.