High-power holmium laser versus pulsed thulium laser for ureteroscopic lithotripsy: Results of a randomized prospective study

高功率钬激光与脉冲铥激光在输尿管镜碎石术中的比较:一项随机前瞻性研究的结果

阅读:3

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Current evidence indicates that the outcomes obtained with the holmium laser (Ho:YAG) and the thulium fiber laser (TFL) in the endoscopic treatment of upper urinary tract stones are at least equivalent. The recent introduction of the pulsed thulium laser (p-Tm:YAG) could result, due to its characteristics, in the ideal combination of its predecessors. The aim of this study was to compare the performance and outcomes between high-power Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective randomized clinical study included patients with a single renal or ureteral stone, who underwent retrograde endoscopic surgery. RESULTS: A total of 122 patients were recruited, of whom 66 (54%) received treatment with the p-Tm:YAG laser. The overall stone-free rate was 65.1% for p-Tm:YAG and 62.5% for Ho:YAG (p = 0.76). Specifically, for renal stones, the stone-free rates were 60.9% vs 48.4% (p = 0.28), respectively. The median energy used in the p-Tm:YAG group was 4.71 kJ compared to 5.31 kJ in the Ho:YAG group (p = 0.28). The postoperative requirement for a double-J catheter was higher in the Ho:YAG group (67.8% vs 50%; p = 0.04). The analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the energy required to treat 1 mm(3) of stone (20 J/mm(3) for p-Tm:YAG vs 22 J/mm(3) for Ho:YAG; p = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Intracorporeal lithotripsy with p-Tm:YAG shows non-inferior results in terms of stone-free rates compared to high-power Ho:YAG. There is a trend in favor of p-Tm:YAG regarding the total energy required and a lower need for a subsequent double-J catheter, which should be corroborated by further studies in this field of urology.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。