{"title":"Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium:YAG for Urological Stone Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Nidal Samira, Moh Sanee, Murad Asali","doi":"10.1177/25785478261415810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy, safety, and procedural outcomes of thulium fiber laser (TFL) compared to Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) in laser lithotripsy for urinary stones, based on a synthesis of randomized and comparative studies.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for studies published between January 2010 and March 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies directly comparing TFL and Ho:YAG in ureteroscopy or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Primary outcomes were stone-free rate (SFR), operative time, complication rate, and retreatment rate. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model; heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight studies were included (7 RCTs, 21 cohort studies), encompassing a total of 3672 patients. TFL was associated with a significantly higher SFR (93.5% vs. 87.2%, <i>p</i> < 0.01), shorter operative time (43.2 vs. 52.8 min, <i>p</i> < 0.001), and lower retreatment rates (4.2% vs. 7.6%, <i>p</i> < 0.01). Complication rates were comparable between groups. Heterogeneity among studies was moderate (I² = 62%); subgroup analysis and sensitivity testing were used to explore sources of variability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TFL demonstrates superior procedural outcomes compared to Ho:YAG in endourological management of urinary stones. Further research into next-generation systems-such as the Cyber Ho Magneto, which integrates high-power Ho:YAG output with TFL-like pulse modulation-may provide additional procedural benefits and warrants formal clinical evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":94169,"journal":{"name":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","volume":" ","pages":"211-215"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/25785478261415810","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the clinical efficacy, safety, and procedural outcomes of thulium fiber laser (TFL) compared to Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) in laser lithotripsy for urinary stones, based on a synthesis of randomized and comparative studies.
Materials and methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for studies published between January 2010 and March 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies directly comparing TFL and Ho:YAG in ureteroscopy or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). Primary outcomes were stone-free rate (SFR), operative time, complication rate, and retreatment rate. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model; heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.
Results: Twenty-eight studies were included (7 RCTs, 21 cohort studies), encompassing a total of 3672 patients. TFL was associated with a significantly higher SFR (93.5% vs. 87.2%, p < 0.01), shorter operative time (43.2 vs. 52.8 min, p < 0.001), and lower retreatment rates (4.2% vs. 7.6%, p < 0.01). Complication rates were comparable between groups. Heterogeneity among studies was moderate (I² = 62%); subgroup analysis and sensitivity testing were used to explore sources of variability.
Conclusion: TFL demonstrates superior procedural outcomes compared to Ho:YAG in endourological management of urinary stones. Further research into next-generation systems-such as the Cyber Ho Magneto, which integrates high-power Ho:YAG output with TFL-like pulse modulation-may provide additional procedural benefits and warrants formal clinical evaluation.
目的:在综合随机对照研究的基础上,系统评价铥光纤激光(TFL)与钬:YAG (Ho:YAG)在尿路结石激光碎石治疗中的临床疗效、安全性和手术结果。材料和方法:本系统评价和荟萃分析遵循2020年系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目。检索了PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library和Scopus在2010年1月至2025年3月之间发表的研究。符合条件的研究包括随机对照试验和队列研究,直接比较TFL和Ho:YAG在输尿管镜检查或逆行肾内手术(RIRS)中的应用。主要结果为结石清除率(SFR)、手术时间、并发症发生率和再治疗率。采用随机效应模型进行meta分析;采用I²统计量评估异质性。结果:纳入28项研究(7项随机对照试验,21项队列研究),共纳入3672例患者。TFL与较高的SFR (93.5% vs. 87.2%, p < 0.01)、较短的手术时间(43.2 vs. 52.8 min, p < 0.001)和较低的再治疗率(4.2% vs. 7.6%, p < 0.01)相关。两组间并发症发生率具有可比性。研究间异质性为中等(I²= 62%);采用亚组分析和敏感性试验探讨变异的来源。结论:与Ho:YAG相比,TFL在尿路结石的腔内治疗中具有更好的手术效果。对下一代系统的进一步研究——例如Cyber Ho Magneto,它集成了高功率Ho:YAG输出和类似tfll的脉冲调制——可能会提供额外的程序优势,并保证正式的临床评估。