Optimal stone density for ablation lithotripsy with vapor tunnel Ho:YAG pulse modality.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Luis Rico, Leandro Blas, Lorena Banda Ramos, Javier Pizzarello, Carlos Ameri, Pablo Contreras
{"title":"Optimal stone density for ablation lithotripsy with vapor tunnel Ho:YAG pulse modality.","authors":"Luis Rico, Leandro Blas, Lorena Banda Ramos, Javier Pizzarello, Carlos Ameri, Pablo Contreras","doi":"10.1007/s11255-024-04289-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Vapor-Tunnel™ (VT) consists of a very long pulse that uses the minimum peak power, causing the energy to pass through a previously created vapor channel or tunnel. There are studies that have shown acceptable ablation lithotripsy efficiency. Nevertheless, there are no in-vivo studies that have compared the VT performance according to the stone density.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study of 152 patients who underwent RIRS using VT Ho:YAG laser was performed. We divided the patients according to the stone density (Group 1: < 1000UH vs. Group 2: > 1000UH). We assessed the lithotripsy efficiency (mm<sup>3</sup>/JJ) and the laser-energy consumption (JJ/mm<sup>3</sup>). The stone-free rate (SFR) was defined as the absence of stone fragments in a non-contrast abdominal computed tomography 4 weeks after the procedure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety three patients were included in Group 1 and 59 in Group 2. Body mass index was higher in Group 1 and the median stone volume was higher in Group 2 (846 vs. 672 mm<sup>3</sup>, p = 0.03). Total energy used (11.9 vs. 24 kj, p < 0.001), the laser emission time (19 vs. 30 min, p < 0.001), and the total operative time (60 vs. 85 min, p < 0.001) were lower in the Group 1. SFR was higher in Group 1 (96.7% vs. 57.6%, p < 0.001) with a global SFR of 81.6%. The ablation lithotripsy efficiency was higher in Group 1 (0.053 mm<sup>3</sup>/JJ vs. 0.035 mm<sup>3</sup>/JJ, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>VT Ho:YAG was associated with decreased laser time, operative time and laser-energy consumption in Group 1 than Group 2. Similarly, VT Ho:YAG increased lithotripsy efficiency and the SFR compared to hard stones with the same laser settings and pulse modality.</p>","PeriodicalId":14454,"journal":{"name":"International Urology and Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-024-04289-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Vapor-Tunnel™ (VT) consists of a very long pulse that uses the minimum peak power, causing the energy to pass through a previously created vapor channel or tunnel. There are studies that have shown acceptable ablation lithotripsy efficiency. Nevertheless, there are no in-vivo studies that have compared the VT performance according to the stone density.

Methods: A retrospective study of 152 patients who underwent RIRS using VT Ho:YAG laser was performed. We divided the patients according to the stone density (Group 1: < 1000UH vs. Group 2: > 1000UH). We assessed the lithotripsy efficiency (mm3/JJ) and the laser-energy consumption (JJ/mm3). The stone-free rate (SFR) was defined as the absence of stone fragments in a non-contrast abdominal computed tomography 4 weeks after the procedure.

Results: Ninety three patients were included in Group 1 and 59 in Group 2. Body mass index was higher in Group 1 and the median stone volume was higher in Group 2 (846 vs. 672 mm3, p = 0.03). Total energy used (11.9 vs. 24 kj, p < 0.001), the laser emission time (19 vs. 30 min, p < 0.001), and the total operative time (60 vs. 85 min, p < 0.001) were lower in the Group 1. SFR was higher in Group 1 (96.7% vs. 57.6%, p < 0.001) with a global SFR of 81.6%. The ablation lithotripsy efficiency was higher in Group 1 (0.053 mm3/JJ vs. 0.035 mm3/JJ, p < 0.001).

Conclusions: VT Ho:YAG was associated with decreased laser time, operative time and laser-energy consumption in Group 1 than Group 2. Similarly, VT Ho:YAG increased lithotripsy efficiency and the SFR compared to hard stones with the same laser settings and pulse modality.

使用蒸汽隧道 Ho:YAG 脉冲模式进行消融碎石的最佳结石密度。
简介:蒸汽隧道疗法(VT)由一个使用最小峰值功率的超长脉冲组成,使能量通过先前创建的蒸汽通道或隧道。有研究表明,消融碎石的效率是可以接受的。然而,目前还没有根据结石密度比较 VT 性能的体内研究:我们对 152 名使用 VT Ho:YAG 激光进行 RIRS 的患者进行了回顾性研究。我们根据结石密度对患者进行了划分(第 1 组:1000UH)。我们评估了碎石效率(mm3/JJ)和激光能量消耗(JJ/mm3)。无结石率(SFR)是指术后 4 周的非对比腹部计算机断层扫描中没有结石碎片:第 1 组有 93 名患者,第 2 组有 59 名患者。第 1 组患者的体重指数较高,第 2 组患者的结石体积中位数较高(846 mm3 对 672 mm3,P = 0.03)。使用的总能量(11.9 kj vs. 24 kj,p 3/JJ vs. 0.035 mm3/JJ,p 结论:VT Ho:YAG 与结石治疗相关:与第二组相比,第一组的 VT Ho:YAG 减少了激光时间、手术时间和激光能量消耗。 同样,在相同的激光设置和脉冲模式下,与硬结石相比,VT Ho:YAG 提高了碎石效率和 SFR。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Urology and Nephrology
International Urology and Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
329
审稿时长
1.7 months
期刊介绍: International Urology and Nephrology publishes original papers on a broad range of topics in urology, nephrology and andrology. The journal integrates papers originating from clinical practice.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信