有赢家吗?前瞻性随机对照试验:比较超脉冲铥光纤激光与脉冲调制高功率钬:YAG 激光用于逆行肾上腺内手术。

IF 5.9 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Journal of Urology Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-07 DOI:10.1097/JU.0000000000004310
Kavita Gupta, Anna Ricapito, Christopher Connors, Raymond Khargi, Alan J Yaghoubian, Blair Gallante, William M Atallah, Mantu Gupta
{"title":"有赢家吗?前瞻性随机对照试验:比较超脉冲铥光纤激光与脉冲调制高功率钬:YAG 激光用于逆行肾上腺内手术。","authors":"Kavita Gupta, Anna Ricapito, Christopher Connors, Raymond Khargi, Alan J Yaghoubian, Blair Gallante, William M Atallah, Mantu Gupta","doi":"10.1097/JU.0000000000004310","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pulse-modulated holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and SuperPulse thulium fiber laser are high-power laser systems used for retrograde intrarenal surgery. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare lithotripsy efficiency, complications, and stone-free rates.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients with CT-confirmed intrarenal stones between 5 and 20 mm were randomly assigned to pulse-modulated Ho:YAG (Moses 2.0, 120 W) or SuperPulse thulium fiber laser (60 W). The primary outcome was absolute (0 fragment) stone-free rate 6 weeks postoperatively evaluated by CT. Secondary outcomes included residual fragment size, laser efficiency, and postoperative complications. Categorical variables were compared using χ<sup>2</sup> or Fisher exact tests. Continuous variables were analyzed with Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-six patients were randomized to pulse-modulated Ho:YAG (n = 33) or SuperPulse thulium fiber laser (n = 33). Absolute stone-free rates were 79% and 82%, respectively (<i>P</i> = .8). Less than 3 mm residual fragments were observed in 18% and 6.1% (<i>P</i> = .3) and ≥ 3 mm residual fragments in 3% and 12% (<i>P</i> = .4), respectively. Total energy used (3.4 vs 3.1 kJ, <i>P</i> = .8) and lasing time (9.4 vs 12.8 minutes, <i>P</i> = .3) were similar. Laser ablation efficiency (0.038 vs 0.055 mm<sup>3</sup>/J, <i>P</i> = .16), laser activity (46% vs 56%, <i>P</i> = .07), and laser ablation speed (0.40 vs 0.42 mm<sup>3</sup>/s, <i>P</i> > .9) did not differ. Emergency department visits (3.0% vs 6.1%, <i>P</i> > .9) and complications (6.1% vs 9.1%, <i>P</i> > .9) were similar.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found no discernible differences between the high-power pulse-modulated Ho:YAG and SuperPulse thulium fiber laser for treatment of renal stones between 5 and 20 mm in terms of stone-free rates by CT scan, laser efficiency, and complications in our single-center study.</p>","PeriodicalId":17471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology","volume":"213 3","pages":"274-282"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is There a Winner? Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing SuperPulse Thulium Fiber Laser vs Pulse-Modulated High-Power Holmium:YAG Laser for Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.\",\"authors\":\"Kavita Gupta, Anna Ricapito, Christopher Connors, Raymond Khargi, Alan J Yaghoubian, Blair Gallante, William M Atallah, Mantu Gupta\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JU.0000000000004310\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Pulse-modulated holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and SuperPulse thulium fiber laser are high-power laser systems used for retrograde intrarenal surgery. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare lithotripsy efficiency, complications, and stone-free rates.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients with CT-confirmed intrarenal stones between 5 and 20 mm were randomly assigned to pulse-modulated Ho:YAG (Moses 2.0, 120 W) or SuperPulse thulium fiber laser (60 W). The primary outcome was absolute (0 fragment) stone-free rate 6 weeks postoperatively evaluated by CT. Secondary outcomes included residual fragment size, laser efficiency, and postoperative complications. Categorical variables were compared using χ<sup>2</sup> or Fisher exact tests. Continuous variables were analyzed with Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-six patients were randomized to pulse-modulated Ho:YAG (n = 33) or SuperPulse thulium fiber laser (n = 33). Absolute stone-free rates were 79% and 82%, respectively (<i>P</i> = .8). Less than 3 mm residual fragments were observed in 18% and 6.1% (<i>P</i> = .3) and ≥ 3 mm residual fragments in 3% and 12% (<i>P</i> = .4), respectively. Total energy used (3.4 vs 3.1 kJ, <i>P</i> = .8) and lasing time (9.4 vs 12.8 minutes, <i>P</i> = .3) were similar. Laser ablation efficiency (0.038 vs 0.055 mm<sup>3</sup>/J, <i>P</i> = .16), laser activity (46% vs 56%, <i>P</i> = .07), and laser ablation speed (0.40 vs 0.42 mm<sup>3</sup>/s, <i>P</i> > .9) did not differ. Emergency department visits (3.0% vs 6.1%, <i>P</i> > .9) and complications (6.1% vs 9.1%, <i>P</i> > .9) were similar.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found no discernible differences between the high-power pulse-modulated Ho:YAG and SuperPulse thulium fiber laser for treatment of renal stones between 5 and 20 mm in terms of stone-free rates by CT scan, laser efficiency, and complications in our single-center study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17471,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"213 3\",\"pages\":\"274-282\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000004310\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000004310","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is There a Winner? Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing SuperPulse Thulium Fiber Laser vs Pulse-Modulated High-Power Holmium:YAG Laser for Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.

Purpose: Pulse-modulated holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and SuperPulse thulium fiber laser are high-power laser systems used for retrograde intrarenal surgery. We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare lithotripsy efficiency, complications, and stone-free rates.

Materials and methods: Patients with CT-confirmed intrarenal stones between 5 and 20 mm were randomly assigned to pulse-modulated Ho:YAG (Moses 2.0, 120 W) or SuperPulse thulium fiber laser (60 W). The primary outcome was absolute (0 fragment) stone-free rate 6 weeks postoperatively evaluated by CT. Secondary outcomes included residual fragment size, laser efficiency, and postoperative complications. Categorical variables were compared using χ2 or Fisher exact tests. Continuous variables were analyzed with Mann-Whitney U tests.

Results: Sixty-six patients were randomized to pulse-modulated Ho:YAG (n = 33) or SuperPulse thulium fiber laser (n = 33). Absolute stone-free rates were 79% and 82%, respectively (P = .8). Less than 3 mm residual fragments were observed in 18% and 6.1% (P = .3) and ≥ 3 mm residual fragments in 3% and 12% (P = .4), respectively. Total energy used (3.4 vs 3.1 kJ, P = .8) and lasing time (9.4 vs 12.8 minutes, P = .3) were similar. Laser ablation efficiency (0.038 vs 0.055 mm3/J, P = .16), laser activity (46% vs 56%, P = .07), and laser ablation speed (0.40 vs 0.42 mm3/s, P > .9) did not differ. Emergency department visits (3.0% vs 6.1%, P > .9) and complications (6.1% vs 9.1%, P > .9) were similar.

Conclusions: We found no discernible differences between the high-power pulse-modulated Ho:YAG and SuperPulse thulium fiber laser for treatment of renal stones between 5 and 20 mm in terms of stone-free rates by CT scan, laser efficiency, and complications in our single-center study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Urology
Journal of Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
11.50
自引率
7.60%
发文量
3746
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The Official Journal of the American Urological Association (AUA), and the most widely read and highly cited journal in the field, The Journal of Urology® brings solid coverage of the clinically relevant content needed to stay at the forefront of the dynamic field of urology. This premier journal presents investigative studies on critical areas of research and practice, survey articles providing short condensations of the best and most important urology literature worldwide, and practice-oriented reports on significant clinical observations.
期刊最新文献
Urologic Oncology: Bladder, Penis, and Urethral Cancer, and Basic Principles of Oncology. Long-Term Recurrence Risk, Metastatic Potential, and Length of Cystoscopic Surveillance of Low-Grade Nonmuscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer. Radiating for Two: Quantifying Radiation Exposure to Pregnant Urologists During Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy. Use and Disuse of Catheterizable Channels as the Primary Method of Emptying the Neuropathic Bladder: A Single Institutional Cohort Study. Clinical and Demographic Factors Linked to Low-Value Emergency Department Visits in Pediatric Patients With Spina Bifida.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1