Comparison of urinary incontinence following three different prostate apex disconnection techniques in transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the incidence of urinary incontinence following transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy with three different prostate apex disconnection techniques: semi-separation, pre-separation, and post-separation. The findings aim to provide references for clinical treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 74 patients treated with transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy for prostatic hyperplasia from April 2022 to March 2023. Complete clinical and follow-up data were available for 52 patients. Clinical and follow-up data were collected for these patients. A comparison was made of urinary incontinence following the three different types of prostate apex disconnection in transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy. RESULTS: In this study, the immediate postoperative urinary incontinence rate for transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy was 9.62% (5/52), the short-term incontinence rate was 11.54% (5/52), and the long-term incontinence rate was 9.62% (5/52). The immediate postoperative incontinence rates for semi-separation, pre-separation, and post- separation were 8.33% (1/12), 8.33% (2/24), and 12.5% (2/16), respectively. The short-term incontinence rates for semi-separation, pre-separation, and post-separation were 8.33% (1/12), 8.33% (2/24), and 18.75% (3/16), respectively. The long-term incontinence rates for semi-separation, pre-separation, and post-separation were 8.33% (1/12), 8.33% (2/24), and 12.5% (2/16), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of urinary incontinence following transurethral thulium laser prostatectomy was lower with semi-separation and pre-separation compared to post-separation.

A historical comparison of thulium fiber laser systems for stone lithotripsy: navigating toward safe and effective parameters.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Medical device companies have introduced new TFL machines, including Soltive (Olympus, Japan), Fiber Dust (Quanta System, Italy), and TFLDrive (Coloplast, France). The primary objective of this study is to compare our initial clinical experiences with TFL using those devices. Through this historical comparison of Thulium Fiber Laser systems for stone lithotripsy, we aim to advance our understanding and approach toward achieving safe and effective TFL parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data for this comparative analysis were extracted from three distinct prospective series that were previously published, outlining our initial clinical experience with the Soltive (Olympus, Japan), FiberDust laser (Quanta System, Italy), and TFLDrive laser (Coloplast, France). Parameters such as stone size, stone density, laser-on time (LOT), and laser settings were meticulously recorded. Additionally, we assessed critical variables such as ablation speed (expressed in mm3/s) and Joules/mm3 for each lithotripsy procedure. RESULTS: A total of 149 patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 120 patients were subjected to analysis concerning renal stones. Statistically significant differences were observed in the median (IQR) stone volume: 650 (127-6027) mm3 for TFLDrive, 1800 (682.8-2760) mm3 for Soltive, and 1125 (294-4000) mm3 for FiberDust (p: 0.007); while there were no differences regarding stone density among the groups. Significant variations were identified in median (IQR) pulse energy, frequency, and total power. The Soltive group exhibited lower energy levels (0.3 J vs. 0.6 J, p: 0.002) but significantly higher pulse frequency (100 Hz vs. 17.5 Hz, p: 0.003) and total power (24 W vs. 11W, p: 0.001) compared to the other groups. Laser-on time showed no substantial differences across all three groups. Additionally, a statistically significant difference was observed in median J/mm3, with the TFLDrive group using higher values (24 J/mm3, p: 0.001), while the Soltive group demonstrated a higher median ablation speed of 1.16 mm3/s (p: 0.001). The overall complication rate remained low for all groups, with comparable stone-free rates. CONCLUSION: By reducing pulsed frequency, we improved laser efficiency, but smaller volumes lead to decreased efficiency due to increased retropulsion and fragment movement. Further studies are needed to identify and establish the appropriate laser settings for this new technology.

Propensity score-matched analysis comparing perioperative, functional, and safety outcomes between thulium fiber laser and bipolar enucleation of the prostate performed by a single surgeon with two years of follow-up.

PURPOSE: To compare perioperative, functional, and safety outcomes between thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) and bipolar enucleation of the prostate performed by a single surgeon with use of propensity score (PS)-matched analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were from 675 patients, 422 of whom underwent ThuFLEP and bipolar enucleation by a single highly experienced surgeon. ThuFLEP was performed with Fiberlase U1 (IRE Polus Ltd.). Perioperative parameters, safety, and functional outcomes, such as International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), postvoid residual volume (PVR), and maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax) were assessed. To control for selection bias, a 1:1 PS-matched analysis was carried out using the following variables as covariates: total prostate volume, preoperative IPSS and early sphincter release. RESULTS: Of 422 patients, 370 (87.7%) underwent ThuFLEP and 52 (12.3%) underwent bipolar enucleation. Operation, enucleation, and morcellation time were comparable between groups before and after PS-matched analysis (p=0.954, p=0.474, p=0.362, respectively). Functional parameters (IPSS, QoL, PVR, Qmax) were also comparable between groups at every time point before and after PS matching. Significant improvements in IPSS, QoL score, Qmax, and PVR were observed during the 24-month follow-up period for both ThuFLEP and bipolar enucleation without any significant differences between groups. Early and late postoperative complications before and after PS-matched analysis were similar. CONCLUSIONS: ThuFLEP was comparable to bipolar enucleation in perioperative characteristics, improvement in voiding parameters, and complication rates. Both procedures were shown to be effective and safe in the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the treatment of bladder cancer: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training and Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (TRUST)-Group.

PURPOSE: To identify laser settings and limits applied by experts during laser vaporization (vapBT) and laser en-bloc resection of bladder tumors (ERBT) and to identify preventive measures to reduce complications. METHODS: After a focused literature search to identify relevant questions, we conducted a survey (57 questions) which was sent to laser experts. The expert selection was based on clinical experience and scientific contribution. Participants were asked for used laser types, typical laser settings during specific scenarios, and preventive measures applied during surgery. Settings for a maximum of 2 different lasers for each scenario were possible. Responses and settings were compared among the reported laser types. RESULTS: Twenty-three of 29 (79.3%) invited experts completed the survey. Thulium fiber laser (TFL) is the most common laser (57%), followed by Holmium:Yttrium-Aluminium-Garnet (Ho:YAG) (48%), continuous wave (cw) Thulium:Yttrium-Aluminium-Garnet (Tm:YAG) (26%), and pulsed Tm:YAG (13%). Experts prefer ERBT (91.3%) to vapBT (8.7%); however, relevant limitations such as tumor size, number, and anatomical tumor location exist. Laser settings were generally comparable; however, we could find significant differences between the laser sources for lateral wall ERBT (p = 0.028) and standard ERBT (p = 0.033), with cwTm:YAG and pulsed Tm:YAG being operated in higher power modes when compared to TFL and Ho:YAG. Experts prefer long pulse modes for Ho:YAG and short pulse modes for TFL lasers. CONCLUSION: TFL seems to have replaced Ho:YAG and Tm:YAG. Most laser settings do not differ significantly among laser sources. For experts, continuous flow irrigation is the most commonly applied measure to reduce complications.

Thulium fiber laser vs. holmium laser enucleation of the prostate: results of a prospective randomized non-inferiority trial.

PURPOSE: Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) represents the current standard procedure for size-independent surgical therapy of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). With advent of the novel laser technology thulium fiber laser (TFL), we hypothesized that the functional outcome of TFL enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) is non-inferior compared to HoLEP. METHODS: From October 2021 to October 2022, 150 patients with BPO were recruited for the prospective randomized trial in accordance with CONSORT. Stratified randomization into the arms ThuFLEP (n = 74) or HoLEP (n = 76) was carried out. The primary endpoint was non-inferior international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and quality of life (QoL) at three months after treatment. Secondary endpoints were rates of complications, peak flow, residual urine and operation times. RESULTS: Preoperative characteristics showed no significant differences. Overall IPSS and QoL improved from 21 to 8 and 4 to 1.5, respectively, after three months of follow-up. No statistically significant differences between ThuFLEP and HoLEP were observed regarding median postoperative IPSS (8.5 vs. 7, p > 0.9), QoL (1 vs. 2, p = 0.6), residual urine (48 vs. 30ml, p = 0.065) and peak flow (19 vs. 17ml/s, p > 0.9). Similarly, safety profile was comparable with no statistically significant differences regarding rate of major complications (5.3 vs. 5.4%, p = 0.5), laser hemostasis time (3 vs. 2min, p = 0.2), use of additive electric coagulation (74 vs. 87%, p = 0.06) or electric coagulation time (8 vs. 8min, p = 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective, randomized trial ThuFLEP showed non-inferior results compared to HoLEP in terms of functional outcomes measured by IPSS and QoL as primary endpoint. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00032699 (18.09.2023, retrospectively registered).

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Dusting vs Fragmentation Using Thulium Fiber Laser in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.

Objective: To compare the dusting vs fragmentation modes with thulium fiber laser (TFL) in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for upper tract stones using the same fixed low-power settings in both the arms. The primary objective was to compare the stone-free rate (SFR) and secondary objectives were to compare mean operating times, hospital stay duration, complication rates, need for secondary procedures, and laser efficacy. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized trial, with patients having proximal ureteral or renal stones of 10-20 mm and planned for RIRS was done at a single institute. A total of 60 consecutively admitted patients with signed consent were included for randomization with 30 patients in each arm of dusting and fragmentation modes. Results: Median age in dusting and fragmentation arms of 41.5 and 45.5 years, median stone size of 10.45 and 12.25 mm, median stone volume of 351.6 and 490.7 mm3, and median stone density of 1263.5 HU in both arms with comparable hospital stay of median of 2 days in both arms. Lasing time was significantly lesser in the fragmentation group (20.5 minutes; interquartile range [IQR] 15.12-31.62) than in the dusting group (34.25 minutes, IQR 26.62-38.62, p < 0.001). Higher ablation speed for fragmentation mode (0.405 mm3/sec, IQR 0.337-0.635) than for dusting mode (0.17 mm3/sec, IQR 0.135-0.325, p < 0.001). SFRs and complication rates were comparable in both the arms. Conclusion: TFL in fragmentation mode has shorter lasing times and better laser efficacy than dusting mode with comparable minimal complications, SFRs, and hospital stay duration. Clinical Trial Registration number: CTRI050827.

Super pulsed thulium fiber laser outcomes in retrograde intrarenal surgery for ureteral and renal stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laser lithotripsy using a thulium fiber laser (TFL) has become an effective treatment option for small renal stones with low complication rates. TFL has a higher absorption coefficient, smaller fibers, and better pulse rate capability. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the published evidence regarding TFL's lithotripsy performance in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), for which we primarily assessed the outcomes of stone-free rate, operation time, and complications. We searched different databases from inception to April 2023. We assessed the methodological quality and risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis and assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Twelve published studies evaluated the efficacy of RIRS using a TFL for treating renal and ureteral stones. The meta-analysis revealed a predicted stone-free rate of 89.37% (95% CI: 83.93% to 93.12%), indicating that, on average, approximately 89.37% of patients achieved a stone-free state after treatment. The substantial heterogeneity among the studies was evident, as shown by a Q-value of 33.1174 and a p-value of 0.0003. The I2 value of 69.80% (95% CI: 25.91% to 92.02%) highlighted the proportion of variability attributed to genuine heterogeneity across the studies. Moreover, the H2 value 3.31 (95% CI: 1.35 to 12.53) indicated significant heterogeneity beyond random chance. The estimated overall effect size (logit-transformed) of 2.1289 was highly statistically significant (z = 8.7648, p < 0.0001) with a confidence interval of 1.6528 to 2.6049. The reported complications varied across studies, encompassing Clavien grade I-II complications in most cases, with a subset experiencing more severe Clavien grade III-V complications. Additionally, other studies noted a range of complications, such as haematuria, fever, transient creatinine elevation, and postoperative issues like bleeding, pain, and sepsis. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that RIRS using TFL is an effective and safe treatment option for renal and ureteral stones, with high stone-free and low complication rates. The included studies exhibited a low risk of bias and were of high quality. However, more extensive randomized controlled trials with extended follow-up periods are needed to investigate this technique's efficacy and safety.

Advances in lasers for the minimally invasive treatment of upper and lower urinary tract conditions: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Technological advancements in laser lithotripsy are expanding into numerous fields of urology, like ureteroscopy (URS), percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), and benign and malignant soft-tissue treatments. Since the amount of research regarding lasers in urology has grown exponentially, we present a systematic review of the most recent and relevant advances encompassing all lasers used in urological endoscopic treatment. METHODS: We performed a literature search using PubMed (May 2023) to obtain information about lasers for urological purposes. We included only recent data from published articles between 2021 and 2023 or articles ahead of print. RESULTS: Lasers are widely used in lithotripsy for ureteric, renal, and bladder stones, benign prostate surgery, and bladder and upper tract tumor ablation. While the holmium (Ho:YAG) laser is still predominant, there seems to be more emphasis on pulse modulation and newer lasers such as thulium fiber laser (TFL) and pulsed Tm:YAG laser. CONCLUSION: The use of lasers and related technological innovations have shown increasing versatility, and over time have proven to be invaluable in the management of stone lithotripsy, treatment of benign and malignant prostate diseases, and urothelial tumors. Laser endoscopic treatment is heavily based on technological nuances, and it is essential to know at least the basics of these technologies. Ultimately the choice of laser used depends on its availability, cost, surgeon experience and expertise.

Thulium Laser for the Treatment of Posterior Urethral Valves in Infants.

Objective: Thulium laser (ThL) has become popular in urology, because of its powerful action on tissue, achieving optimal ablation and hemostasis. Aim of our article was to evaluate efficacy of ThL in infants affected by posterior urethral valve (PUV) ablation. Patients and Methods: Clinical charts of 25 infants (age ≤12 months) who underwent PUV ablation were retrospectively reviewed. According to our protocol, all patients performed voiding cystourethrography and cystoscopy 6 to 8 months after initial treatment. Several factors, including age and weight at surgery, operative time, postoperative bleeding, catheterization period, postoperative urinary retention, retreatment for valve remnants, and stricture at follow-up, were evaluated. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were analyzed. Results: Mean age at primary surgery was 4.5 months (5 days-10.5 months) and mean weight at primary surgery was 5.7 kg (2.5-10.3 kg). Mean operative time was 29.5 minutes (range 15-50 minutes). None of the patients experienced intraoperative and postoperative bleeding. In all cases, postoperative catheterization period was 1 day. Residual valves were found in 6 of 25 (24%) patients. No cases of urethral stricture were registered during follow-up (48.4 months, range: 11-95). Analyzing literature data using other techniques, complication rate of ThL PUV ablation seems lower than standard treatments (electrofulguration, cold knife) and comparable with those reported with other laser techniques. Conclusion: PUV ablation with ThL has proven to be feasible and safe in infants. Further studies are needed to define the real effectiveness of this laser technology in PUV ablation. Miniaturized instruments and ThL technology make early PUV treatment feasible also in low body weight newborns.

A randomized trial of holmium laser vs thulium laser vs bipolar enucleation of large prostate glands.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcome and morbidity of bipolar transurethral enucleation of the prostate (B-TUEP) and thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) with those of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) in the treatment of large symptomatic benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) through a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (NCT03916536). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 155 patients were recruited from a single centre between February 2019 and August 2020. All had BPO, with a prostate volume ≥80 ml. Patients were randomly assigned to HoLEP, ThuLEP or B-TUEP using computer-generated random tables in a 1:1:1 ratio. Participants, investigators and surgeons were blinded to group assignment until the date of the operation. Thereafter, the patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax ) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included assessment of other functional urinary variables, peri-operative records, and adverse events. RESULTS: There were 138 and 120 patients available for analysis at 6 and 12 months. There was no significant difference in Qmax between the groups at 6 and 12 months (P = 0.4 and P = 0.7, respectively), and no significant difference regarding International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL) or postvoid residual urine volume (PVR). The median (interquartile range) prostate-specific antigen (PSA) reductions (ng/ml) were similar in the three groups at last follow-up point (4.7 [2.2-7.1]; 5.6 [2.3-9.5] and 5 [3.4-10] after HoLEP, ThuLEP and B-TUEP, respectively). Differences in enucleation time, enucleation efficiencies and auxiliary manoeuvres were statistically insignificant (P = 0.1, 0.8 and 0.07, respectively). At 1 year, patients with prostate volumes >120 ml showed significant IPSS improvement in favour of HoLEP and ThuLEP (P = 0.01). Low- and high-grade adverse effects were recorded in 31 and five cases, respectively, with no statistically significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that ThuLEP and B-TUEP are as safe and effective as HoLEP for the treatment of large-sized BPO. Significant PSA reductions indicate that there was effective adenoma enucleation with all three approaches. The study provides objective evidence that endoscopic enucleation of the prostate is a technique rather than energy dependent procedure.

[Comparison of efficacy and safety of transurethral thulium laser vapoenucleation of prostate and transurethral thulium laser enucleation of prostate in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia].

Objective: To compare early outcomes between transurethral thulium laser vapoenucleation of prostate and transurethral thulium laser enucleation of prostate for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Methods: Retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 1 638 BPH patients admitted to the Department of Urology of Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from January 2018 to December 2021. There were 916 patients underwent transurethral thulium laser vapoenucleation of prostate (ThuVEP group) and 722 patients underwent transurethral thulium laser enucleation of prostate (ThuLEP group). The operation time, eliminated tissue weight, surgical complications, duration of post-operative catheter implantation were compared between the two groups. The improvement of International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), Quality of Life Index (QoL), maximum uroflow rate (Qmax) and post-void residual urine volume (PVR) at 1 month after operation was compared between the two groups. Results: There were no significant differences in age, preoperative and 1-month postoperative prostate volume, IPSS score, QoL score, Qmax, and PVR between the ThuVEP and ThuLEP group (all P>0.05). There were no significant differences in perioperative indicators such as operation time, cutting or enucleation time, tissue crushing time, tissue weight, hemoglobin change, catheter indwelling time, and postoperative hospital stay between ThuVEP group and ThuLEP group (all P>0.05). The incidence of minor gross hematuria after extubation in the ThuVEP group was 7.8% (56/916), which was lower than 9.4% (65/722) in the ThuLEP group (P=0.026); the incidence of temporary incontinence at 1 month after surgery was 5.2% (38/916) in ThuVEP group, lower than 11.9% (86/722) in ThuLEP group (P<0.001). A total of 3 patients (0.4%) in ThuLEP group required operative intervention for severe post-operation bleeding, but none of ThuVEP group suffered from this kind of surgical complications. Conclusions: ThuVEP has similar efficacy with ThuLEP for the treatment of BPH. ThuVEP can significantly reduce the incidence of post-operation temporary urine incontinence, and has much superiority in stanching bleeding.

En Bloc Resection of Bladder Tumors (ERBT) using different lasers - Hybrid and Holmium Laser.

INTRODUCTION: The En-bloc Resection of Bladder Tumors (ERBT) is a method that offers more benefits compared to the traditional Transurethral Resection of Bladder Tumor (TURBT) (1, 2). Recent studies have shown that ERBT offers better pathological analysis and oncological outcomes (3-6). Thulium and holmium are the most frequently used lasers for this procedure, with the hybrid laser being a new addition that combines thulium and diode to improve hemostatic properties (5, 7-9). OBJECTIVE: This report aims to discuss the use of two types of lasers, hybrid and holmium, for ERBT. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two case studies were conducted. The first case featured a 68-year-old male with two tumors measuring 1.5cm and 2cm. The hybrid laser was used for the procedure. The second case involved a 70-year-old female with a 5cm tumor on the posterior bladder wall, and holmium laser was used with morcellation of the tumor. The quality of histopathological analysis was evaluated. The perioperative data and the entire procedure of the two cases were documented in a step-by-step video. RESULTS: Both lasers demonstrated excellent results without technical difficulties. There was no bleeding, and both patients were discharged with one day of hospitalization. The detrusor muscle was present without artifacts, and the morcellation did not affect the analysis. The first case showed a pT1G3, and the second case showed a pT2 urothelial carcinoma. The hybrid laser exhibited superior hemostatic capacity compared to the holmium laser. CONCLUSION: ERBT can use hybrid or holmium lasers without affecting histopathological analysis, even with morcellation.

Experts' recommendations in laser use for the endoscopic treatment of prostate hypertrophy: a comprehensive guide by the European Section of Uro-Technology (ESUT) and Training-Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (T.R.U.S.T.)-Group.

PURPOSE: To identify expert laser settings for BPH treatment and evaluate the application of preventive measures to reduce complications. METHODS: A survey was conducted after narrative literature research to identify relevant questions regarding laser use for BPH treatment (59 questions). Experts were asked for laser settings during specific clinical scenarios. Settings were compared for the reported laser types, and common settings and preventive measures were identified. RESULTS: Twenty-two experts completed the survey with a mean filling time of 12.9 min. Ho:YAG, Thulium fiber laser (TFL), continuous wave (cw) Tm:YAG, pulsed Tm:YAG and Greenlight™ lasers are used by 73% (16/22), 50% (11/22), 23% (5/22), 13.6% (3/22) and 9.1% (2/22) of experts, respectively. All experts use anatomical enucleation of the prostate (EEP), preferentially in one- or two-lobe technique. Laser settings differ significantly between laser types, with median laser power for apical/main gland EEP of 75/94 W, 60/60 W, 100/100 W, 100/100 W, and 80/80 W for Ho:YAG, TFL, cwTm:YAG, pulsed Tm:YAG and Greenlight™ lasers, respectively (p = 0.02 and p = 0.005). However, power settings within the same laser source are similar. Pulse shapes for main gland EEP significantly differ between lasers with long and pulse shape modified (e.g., Moses, Virtual Basket) modes preferred for Ho:YAG and short pulse modes for TFL (p = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Ho:YAG lasers no longer seem to be the mainstay of EEP. TFL lasers are generally used in pulsed mode though clinical applicability for quasi-continuous settings has recently been demonstrated. One and two-lobe techniques are beneficial regarding operative time and are used by most experts.

Initial clinical experience with the pulsed solid-state thulium YAG laser from Dornier during RIRS: first 25 cases.

INTRODUCTION: Holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber (TFL) lasers are currently the two laser sources recommended for endocorporeal laser lithotripsy (ELL). Recently, the pulsed-thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG) laser was also proposed for ELL, as an answer to both Ho:YAG and TFL limitations. We aimed to evaluate the efficiency, safety, and laser settings of Tm:YAG laser in ELL during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS). METHODS: A prospective study of the first 25 patients with ureteral and renal stones who underwent RIRS using the Thulio (pulsed-Tm:YAG, Dornier©, Germany) was performed in a single center. 272 µm laser fibers were used. Stone size, stone density, laser-on time (LOT) and laser settings were recorded. We also assessed the ablation speed (mm3/s), Joules/mm3 and laser power (W) values for each procedure. Postoperative results, such as stone-free rate (SFR) and zero fragments rate (ZFR) were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients were analyzed (Table 1). The median (IQR) age was 55 (44-72) years old. Median (IQR) stone volume was 2849 (916-9153)mm3. Median (IQR) stone density was 1000 (600-1174)HU. Median (IQR) pulse energy, pulse rate and total power were 0.6 (0.6-0,8)J, 15(15-20)Hz and 12(9-16)W, respectively. All procedures used "Captive Fragmenting" pulse modulation (Table 2). The median (IQR) J/mm3 was 14,8 (6-21). The median (IQR) ablation rate was 0,75 (0,46-2)mm3/s. One postoperative complications occurred (streinstrasse). SFR and ZFR were 95% and 55%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The pulsed-Tm:YAG laser is a safe and effective laser source for lithotripsy during RIRS, using low pulse energy and low pulse frequency.

Holmium laser with MOSES technology (MoLEP) vs Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) in a real-world setting. Mid-term outcomes from a multicenter propensity score analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare Holmium laser with MOSES technology (MoLEP) and Thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) in terms of surgical and functional outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent either procedure in five centers (January 2020-January 2022). EXCLUSION CRITERIA: previous urethral/prostatic surgery, radiotherapy, concomitant surgery. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to adjust for the bias inherent to the different characteristics at baseline. Differences between procedures were estimated using Firth Penalized Likelihood regression for International prostate symptom score (IPSS), quality of life (QL), maximum flow rate (Qmax). RESULTS: PSM retrieved 118 patients in each group. Baseline characteristics were similar except for PSA and number of men on indwelling catheter (higher in MoLEP group). Median surgical time was significantly longer in the MoLEP group despite the enucleation and morcellation times being similar. Median catheter dwelling time and postoperative length of stay were similar. Most of the early complications were Clavien ≤ 2 grade. There were only two Clavien grade 3 complications (one for each group), one grade 4 in MoLEP group. Rate and type of early and persistent incontinence (> 3 months) were similar. At 12-month, proportion of patients reaching a decrease (Δ) of IPSS ≥ 18 from baseline was significantly larger in MoLEP group, with no significant difference in ΔQmax > 12 ml/sec and ΔQL ≥ -3. CONCLUSION: MoLEP and ThuFLEP were safe and efficacious procedures with similar short-term operative and functional outcomes. At 1-year, MoLEP patients had a sustained reduction of IPPS score.

Navigating urolithiasis treatment: assessing the practicality and performance of thulium fiber laser, holmium YAG, and thulium YAG in real-world scenarios.

BACKGROUND: The management of urolithiasis has undergone significant advancements with the introduction of pulsed lasers, particularly the holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser, which is currently considered the gold standard in endourology. However, the Ho:YAG laser has certain limitations, such as the inability to support small laser fibers (150 µm) and the requirement of a heavy water cooling system, making it challenging to transfer between operating rooms. These limitations have led to the emergence of new laser technologies, including the thulium fiber laser (TFL) and the thulium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser (Tm:YAG), as potential alternatives to the Ho:YAG laser. METHODS: In this review, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of TFL, Ho:YAG, and Tm:YAG lasers in real-life scenarios by comparing clinical trial data with laboratory findings. A literature review was conducted, and relevant in vitro studies and clinical trials until March 2023 were analyzed. RESULTS: The findings indicate that TFL has demonstrated high ablation efficiency for stones of any composition, size, and location, superior the capabilities of Ho:YAG lasers. TFL has shown superior dusting and fragmentation abilities, lower retropulsion, and increased patient safety. The laser parameters, such as ablation efficiency, speed, operative time, dust quality, retropulsion, visibility, temperature safety, and stone-free rate, were compared between laboratory studies and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Although the number of studies on TFL is limited, the available evidence suggests that TFL represents a significant advancement in laser technology for lithotripsy. However, further research is needed to fully explore the implications and limitations of TFL and Tm:YAG lasers.

Thulium fiber laser in cystine calculi.

INTRODUCTION: Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL) is the most modern technology to treat nephrolithiasis and ureterolithiasis in endourology. Although there are a lot of new studies coming up, we still don't have data on how this laser works in some rare diseases.Cystinuria is the most common genetic nephrolithiasis disorder (1), known for its recurrent lithiasis (2). Our main goal in this video is to show a successful case of cystine calculi treated with Thulium Fiber Laser (Laser Fiber Dust/Quanta System™). Cystinuria is the most common genetic nephrolithiasis disorder (1), known for its recurrent lithiasis (2). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 25 years-old male, cystinuric, presented with a CT scan, showing a 10mm stone on the right side and two calculi 6 and 7 mm on the left side, all located in the lower calyx. Bilateral flexible ureteroscopy was done using a reusable digital flexible ureteroscope. Starting on the left side, we repositioned the stone from the lower to the upper calyx, using a tipless front opening basket. Lithotripsy was performed using TFL. Settings were 100 Hz (frequency) and 100 mJ (energy) for dusting.  Popcorn technique was also used, setting the laser at 100Hz and 200 mJ, obtaining good dusting. On the right side, lithotripsy was performed in the inferior calyx, also resulting in "snowstorm". Procedure time was 120 minutes. RESULTS: The postoperative was uneventful. Follow up CT showed a 3 mm residual fragment in the right kidney. CONCLUSION: This video demonstrates the treatment of bilateral cystine calculi with Thulium Fiber Laser. Reasonable procedure time and excellent dusting results are encouraging, pointing towards great improvements in endourology.

In Pursuit of the Optimal Dusting Settings with the Thulium Fiber Laser: An In Vitro Assessment.

Objective: Low energy and high frequency settings are used in stone dusting for holmium lasers. Such settings may not be optimal for thulium fiber laser (TFL). With the seemingly endless combination of settings, we aim to provide guidance to the practicing urologists and assess the efficiency of the TFL platform in an automated in vitro "dusting model." Materials/Methods: Three experimental setups were designed to investigate stone dusting produced by an IPG Photonics TLR-50 W TFL system using 200 µm fiber and soft BegoStone phantoms. The most popular 10 and 20 W dusting settings among endourologist familiar with TFL were evaluated. We directly compared short pulse (SP) vs long pulse (LP) mode using various combinations of pulse energy (Ep) and pulse frequency (F). Thereafter, we tested the 10 and 20 W settings and compared them among each other to elucidate the most efficient settings at each power. Treatments were performed under the same total laser energy delivered to the stone at four different standoff distances (SDs) with a clinically relevant scanning speed of either 1 or 2 mm/sec. Ablation volumes were quantified by optical coherence tomography to assess stone dusting efficiency. Fragment size after ablation at different pulse energies was evaluated by sieving and evaluating under a microscope after treatment. Results: Overall, SP provided greater ablation volume when compared with LP. Our dusting efficiency model demonstrated that the maximum stone ablation was achieved at the combination of high energy/low frequency settings (p < 0.005) and at a SD of 0.2 mm. At all tested pulse energies, no stone phantoms were broken into fragments >1 mm. Conclusions: During stone dusting with TFL, SP offers superior ablation to LP settings. Optimal dusting at clinically relevant scanning speeds of 1 and 2 mm/sec occurs at high energy/low frequency settings. Thulium lithotripsy with high Ep does not result in increased fragment size.