RESUMEN
Objective: Disintegrating cystine and calcium oxalate monohydrate stones present a formidable challenge owing to their hardness and distinct composition. This study aimed to establish optimal laser settings for these hard stones lithotripsy. Patients and Methods: Cystine and calcium oxalate monohydrate stones were extracted from two patients. Two experiments were conducted in vitro by utilizing a 272 µm laser fiber with variable settings to disintegrate the cystine and calcium oxalate monohydrate stones. In the first experiment, energy was adjustable while frequency was constant, whereas the second experiment involved constant energy with adjustable frequency on each type of stone and each experiment was repeated three times to ensure robustness and reliability. Results: Our findings indicated that for cystine stones, use of higher total power with high energy and low frequency proved to be effective. Conversely, for calcium oxalate monohydrate stones, settings involving higher total power with low energy and high frequency demonstrated superior efficacy and safety. Conclusion: Holmium (Ho: YAG) laser settings with higher total power, high energy, and low frequency effectively disintegrate cystine stones despite increased heat, which was measured by a thermometer with a thermocouple. For calcium oxalate monohydrate stones, higher total power, high frequency, and low energy settings are recommended and safe.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: For renal stones < 2 cm, guidelines recommend the use of retrograde intrarenal surgery as a first line treatment option. Many available single use flexible ureteroscopy were found. We aim to compare the effectiveness of two single use flexible ureteroscopy; Pusen Uscope 3011 versus LithoVue in the management of renal stones less than 2 cm. METHODS: Our study prospectively included 60 patients equally divided in to two groups: Pusen group and LithoVue group during the period from June 2020 to June 2021. The included patients were above 18 years old. Perioperative details as operative time, fluoroscopy time, hospital stay, and complications were recorded. Stone free rate was assessed. Base purchase cost was also compared. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding age, gender, and body mass index (BMI), stones size, side, number and location. The perioperative evaluation and outcome had no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding the operative time, hospital stay, access sheath use, and stone free rate or radiation exposure. Among all cases, we had 49 cases (81.6%) with no postoperative complications (21 cases for Pusen group and 28 cases for LithoVue group). The incidence of postoperative complications was significantly higher among Pusen group than LithoVue group (p = 0.02). Initial purchase cost for both FURS had no significant difference (P = 0.86). CONCLUSION: RIRS can be performed effectively with Pusen 3011 and LithoVue single use flexible ureteroscopy in patients diagnosed with renal calculi < 2 cm with superior outcomes with LithoVue.
