{"title":"半刚性输尿管镜下钬激光与钬激光治疗输尿管结石的比较研究:前瞻性单中心研究","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ajur.2023.01.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare the efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser (TFL) and holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for ureteric stone management with semi-rigid ureteroscopy.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In a prospective study from January 2020 to December 2021, we compared 40 patients in each group who underwent semi-rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy with TFL and that with Ho:YAG laser. Stone volume, stone density, stone fragmentation rates, total lasing time, total operative time, endoscopic vision, retropulsion and stone free rates were analyzed in both groups and compared.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Mean stone volume was comparable in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group (282.45 [standard deviation, SD 139.79] mm<sup>3</sup> <em>vs.</em> 279.49 [SD 312.52] mm<sup>3</sup>; <em>p</em>=0.964). Mean stone density was also comparable in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group (1135.30 [SD 317.04] Hounsfield unit <em>vs.</em> 1131.75 [SD 283.03] Hounsfield unit; <em>p</em>=0.959). The mean stone fragmentation rates calculated as stone volume divided by lasing time were 25.85 (SD 10.61) mm<sup>3</sup>/min and 21.37 (SD 14.13) mm<sup>3</sup>/min in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group, respectively (<em>p</em>=0.113). The mean total lasing time (10.15 [SD] 4.69 min <em>vs.</em> 11.43 [SD 4.56] min; <em>p</em>=0.222), mean operative time (25.13 [SD 9.51] min <em>vs.</em> 25.54 [SD 10.32] min; <em>p</em>=0.866), and mean total hospital stay (2.62 [SD 0.77] days <em>vs.</em> 2.61 [SD 0.84] days; <em>p</em>=0.893) were comparable in the TFL group and in the Ho:YAG group. The vision was better and retropulsion was less in the TFL group. The stone-free rate at 1 month postoperatively was slightly better in the TFL group (100% <em>vs.</em> 90%; <em>p</em>=0.095).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>TFL technology was associated with the comparable total surgical time, total lasing time, and stone fragmentation rate with Ho:YAG laser. However, TFL had better endoscopic vision, lesser stone retropulsion, and slightly better stone-free rates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46599,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Urology","volume":"11 3","pages":"Pages 460-465"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214388223000164/pdfft?md5=d8ae53c9d44a00b77b3b51143bcb5daa&pid=1-s2.0-S2214388223000164-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative study of thulium fiber laser versus holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser for ureteric stone management with semi-rigid ureteroscopy: A prospective, single-center study\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajur.2023.01.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare the efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser (TFL) and holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for ureteric stone management with semi-rigid ureteroscopy.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In a prospective study from January 2020 to December 2021, we compared 40 patients in each group who underwent semi-rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy with TFL and that with Ho:YAG laser. Stone volume, stone density, stone fragmentation rates, total lasing time, total operative time, endoscopic vision, retropulsion and stone free rates were analyzed in both groups and compared.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Mean stone volume was comparable in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group (282.45 [standard deviation, SD 139.79] mm<sup>3</sup> <em>vs.</em> 279.49 [SD 312.52] mm<sup>3</sup>; <em>p</em>=0.964). Mean stone density was also comparable in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group (1135.30 [SD 317.04] Hounsfield unit <em>vs.</em> 1131.75 [SD 283.03] Hounsfield unit; <em>p</em>=0.959). The mean stone fragmentation rates calculated as stone volume divided by lasing time were 25.85 (SD 10.61) mm<sup>3</sup>/min and 21.37 (SD 14.13) mm<sup>3</sup>/min in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group, respectively (<em>p</em>=0.113). The mean total lasing time (10.15 [SD] 4.69 min <em>vs.</em> 11.43 [SD 4.56] min; <em>p</em>=0.222), mean operative time (25.13 [SD 9.51] min <em>vs.</em> 25.54 [SD 10.32] min; <em>p</em>=0.866), and mean total hospital stay (2.62 [SD 0.77] days <em>vs.</em> 2.61 [SD 0.84] days; <em>p</em>=0.893) were comparable in the TFL group and in the Ho:YAG group. The vision was better and retropulsion was less in the TFL group. The stone-free rate at 1 month postoperatively was slightly better in the TFL group (100% <em>vs.</em> 90%; <em>p</em>=0.095).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>TFL technology was associated with the comparable total surgical time, total lasing time, and stone fragmentation rate with Ho:YAG laser. However, TFL had better endoscopic vision, lesser stone retropulsion, and slightly better stone-free rates.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Urology\",\"volume\":\"11 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 460-465\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214388223000164/pdfft?md5=d8ae53c9d44a00b77b3b51143bcb5daa&pid=1-s2.0-S2214388223000164-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Urology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214388223000164\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214388223000164","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative study of thulium fiber laser versus holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser for ureteric stone management with semi-rigid ureteroscopy: A prospective, single-center study
Objective
To compare the efficacy and safety of thulium fiber laser (TFL) and holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for ureteric stone management with semi-rigid ureteroscopy.
Methods
In a prospective study from January 2020 to December 2021, we compared 40 patients in each group who underwent semi-rigid ureteroscopic lithotripsy with TFL and that with Ho:YAG laser. Stone volume, stone density, stone fragmentation rates, total lasing time, total operative time, endoscopic vision, retropulsion and stone free rates were analyzed in both groups and compared.
Results
Mean stone volume was comparable in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group (282.45 [standard deviation, SD 139.79] mm3vs. 279.49 [SD 312.52] mm3; p=0.964). Mean stone density was also comparable in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group (1135.30 [SD 317.04] Hounsfield unit vs. 1131.75 [SD 283.03] Hounsfield unit; p=0.959). The mean stone fragmentation rates calculated as stone volume divided by lasing time were 25.85 (SD 10.61) mm3/min and 21.37 (SD 14.13) mm3/min in the TFL group and the Ho:YAG laser group, respectively (p=0.113). The mean total lasing time (10.15 [SD] 4.69 min vs. 11.43 [SD 4.56] min; p=0.222), mean operative time (25.13 [SD 9.51] min vs. 25.54 [SD 10.32] min; p=0.866), and mean total hospital stay (2.62 [SD 0.77] days vs. 2.61 [SD 0.84] days; p=0.893) were comparable in the TFL group and in the Ho:YAG group. The vision was better and retropulsion was less in the TFL group. The stone-free rate at 1 month postoperatively was slightly better in the TFL group (100% vs. 90%; p=0.095).
Conclusion
TFL technology was associated with the comparable total surgical time, total lasing time, and stone fragmentation rate with Ho:YAG laser. However, TFL had better endoscopic vision, lesser stone retropulsion, and slightly better stone-free rates.
期刊介绍:
Asian Journal of Urology (AJUR), launched in October 2014, is an international peer-reviewed Open Access journal jointly founded by Shanghai Association for Science and Technology (SAST) and Second Military Medical University (SMMU). AJUR aims to build a communication platform for international researchers to effectively share scholarly achievements. It focuses on all specialties of urology both scientifically and clinically, with article types widely covering editorials, opinions, perspectives, reviews and mini-reviews, original articles, cases reports, rapid communications, and letters, etc. Fields of particular interest to the journal including, but not limited to: • Surgical oncology • Endourology • Calculi • Female urology • Erectile dysfunction • Infertility • Pediatric urology • Renal transplantation • Reconstructive surgery • Radiology • Pathology • Neurourology.