Steady-state versus burst lasing techniques for thulium fiber laser.

Autor: Sierra A; Urology Department, Hospital Clínic de Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036, Barcelona, Spain. asierradelrio@gmail.com.; Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis No. 20 Tenon Hospital, 75020, Paris, France. asierradelrio@gmail.com.; Department of Urology AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, 75020, Paris, France. asierradelrio@gmail.com.; Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS Group), Paris, France. asierradelrio@gmail.com., Solano C; Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis No. 20 Tenon Hospital, 75020, Paris, France.; Department of Urology AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, 75020, Paris, France.; Uroclin, Medellín, Colombia., Corrales M; Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis No. 20 Tenon Hospital, 75020, Paris, France.; Department of Urology AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, 75020, Paris, France.; Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS Group), Paris, France., Ventimiglia E; Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis No. 20 Tenon Hospital, 75020, Paris, France.; Department of Urology AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, 75020, Paris, France.; Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS Group), Paris, France.; Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy., Panthier F; Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis No. 20 Tenon Hospital, 75020, Paris, France.; Department of Urology AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, 75020, Paris, France.; Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS Group), Paris, France., Kwok JL; Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis No. 20 Tenon Hospital, 75020, Paris, France.; Department of Urology AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, 75020, Paris, France.; Departament of Urology, University Hospital Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.; Departament of Urology, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore., Chicaud M; Department of Urology, Limoges University Hospital, 2 Avenue Martin Luther King, 87000, Limoges, France., Keller EX; Progressive Endourological Association for Research and Leading Solutions (PEARLS Group), Paris, France.; University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland., Traxer O; Sorbonne University GRC Urolithiasis No. 20 Tenon Hospital, 75020, Paris, France.; Department of Urology AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Sorbonne University, 75020, Paris, France.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: World journal of urology [World J Urol] 2024 Aug 19; Vol. 42 (1), pp. 487. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Aug 19.
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05102-1
Abstrakt: Objective: To evaluate the stone ablation rate and direct thermal damage from thulium fiber laser (TFL) lithotripsy using continuous (C) and burst (B) lasing techniques on an in vitro ureteral model.
Methods: The TFL Drive (Coloplast, Humlebaek, Denmark) was used in an in vitro saline-submerged ureteral model. Ten participants, including five junior and five experienced urologists, conducted the experimental setup with 7 different settings comparing two lasing techniques: steady-state lasing (0.5 J/10 Hz = 5W for 300 s and 0.5 J/20 Hz = 10W for 150 s) and burst, intermittent 5 s on/off lasing (0.5 J/20 Hz, 0.5 J/30 Hz, 0.5 J/60 Hz, 0.1 J/200 Hz, and 0.05 J/400 Hz) with a target cumulative energy of 1500 J using cubic 125 mm 3 phantom BegoStonesTM. Ureteral damage was graded 1-3 based on the severity of burns and holes observed on the surface of the ureteral model.
Results: The were no significant differences in stone ablation mass neither between C and B lasing techniques, nor between expertise levels. At C lasing technique had only mild ureteral lesions with no significant differences between expertise levels (p: 0.97) or laser settings (p: 0.71). At B lasing technique, different types of thermal lesions were found with no expertise (p: 0.11) or setting (p: 0.83) differences. However, B laser setting had higher grade direct thermal lesions than C (p: 0.048).
Conclusion: Regarding efficacy, C and B lasing techniques achieve comparable stone ablation rates. Safety-wise, B lasing mode showed higher grade of direct thermal lesions. These results should be further investigated to verify which of the lasing mode is the safest in vivo. Until then and unless proven otherwise, a C mode with low frequency should be recommended to avoid ureteral wall lesions.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: