Getting hot in here! Comparison of Holmium vs. thulium laser in an anatomic hydrogel kidney model

Christopher Wanderling1, Aaron Saxton1, Dennis Phan1, Karen M Doersch1, Lauren Shepard2, Nathan Schuler1, Stephen Hassig1, Scott Quarrier1, Thomas Osinski1, Ahmed Ghazi2
1Department of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, USA
2Johns Hopkins Brady Institute of Urologic Surgery, Baltimore, USA

Tóm tắt

As laser technology has advanced, high-power lasers have become increasingly common. The Holmium: yttrium–aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser has long been accepted as the standard for laser lithotripsy. The thulium fiber laser (TFL) has recently been established as a viable option. The aim of this study is to evaluate thermal dose and temperature for the Ho:YAG laser to the TFL at four different laser settings while varying energy, frequency, operator duty cycle (ODC). Utilizing high-fidelity, 3D-printed hydrogel models of a pelvicalyceal collecting system (PCS) with a synthetic BegoStone implanted in the renal pelvis, laser lithotripsy was performed with the Ho:YAG laser or TFL. At a standard power (40W) and irrigation (17.9 ml/min), we evaluated four different laser settings with ODC variations with different time-on intervals. Temperature was measured at two separate locations. In general, the TFL yielded greater cumulative thermal doses than the Ho:YAG laser. Thermal dose and temperature were typically greater at the stone when compared away from the stone. Regarding the TFL, there was no general trend if fragmentation or dusting settings yielded greater thermal doses or temperatures. The TFL generated greater temperatures and thermal doses in general than the Ho:YAG laser with Moses technology. Temperatures and thermal doses were greater closer to the laser fiber tip. It is inconclusive as to whether fragmentation or dusting settings elicit greater thermal loads for the TFL. Energy, frequency, ODC, and laser-on time significantly impact thermal loads during ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy, independent of power.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Rezakahn Khajeh N, Majdalany SE, Ghani KR (2021) Moses 2.0 for high-power ureteroscopic stone dusting: clinical principles for step-by-step video technique. J Endourol 35(S3):S22–S28 Dauw CA et al (2015) Contemporary practice patterns of flexible ureteroscopy for treating renal stones: results of a worldwide survey. J Endourol 29(11):1221–1230 Aldoukhi AH et al (2020) Defining thermally safe laser lithotripsy power and irrigation parameters. J Endourol 34(1):76–81 Pauchard F et al (2022) A practical guide for intra-renal temperature and pressure management during rirs: what is the evidence telling us. J Clin Med 11(12):3429 Traxer O, Keller EX (2020) Thulium fiber laser: the new player for kidney stone treatment? A comparison with Holmium:YAG laser. World J Urol 38(8):1883–1894 Belle JD et al (2022) Does the novel thulium fiber laser have a higher risk of urothelial thermal injury than the conventional holmium laser in an. J Endourol 36(9):1249–1254 Sapareto SA, Dewey WC (1984) Thermal dose determination in cancer therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 10(6):787–800 Maxwell AD et al (2019) Simulation of laser lithotripsy-induced heating in the urinary tract. J Endourol 33(2):113–119 Aldoukhi AH et al (2017) Thermal response to high-power holmium laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 31(12):1308–1312 Ghazi A, Melnyk R, Cook A et al (2022) PD37–06 Comparison Of computational simulation and hydrogel kidney phantoms for in vivo assessment of intrarenal pressure (IRP) dynamics during ureteroscopy under various experimental conditions. J Urol 207:e641 Saba P et al (2020) Development of a high-fidelity robot-assisted kidney transplant simulation platform using three-dimensional printing and hydrogel casting technologies. J Endourol 34(10):1088–1094 Braunstein L et al (2022) Characterization of acoustic, cavitation, and thermal properties of poly(vinyl alcohol) hydrogels for use as therapeutic ultrasound tissue mimics. Ultrasound Med Biol 48(6):1095–1109 Louters MM et al (2022) Laser operator duty cycle effect on temperature and thermal dose: in-vitro study. World J Urol 40(6):1575–1580 Dau JJ et al (2021) Effect of chilled irrigation on caliceal fluid temperature and time to thermal injury threshold during laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 35(5):700–705 Aldoukhi AH et al (2021) Patterns of laser activation during ureteroscopic lithotripsy: effects on caliceal fluid temperature and thermal dose. J Endourol 35(8):1217–1222 Chua ME et al (2023) Thulium fibre laser vs holmium: yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser lithotripsy for urolithiasis: meta-analysis of clinical studies. BJU Int 131(4):383–394 Molina WR et al (2021) Temperature rise during ureteral laser lithotripsy: comparison of super pulse thulium fiber laser (SPTF) vs high power 120 W holmium-YAG laser (Ho:YAG). World J Urol 39(10):3951–3956 Taratkin M et al (2020) Temperature changes during laser lithotripsy with Ho:YAG laser and novel Tm-fiber laser: a comparative in-vitro study. World J Urol 38(12):3261–3266 Andreeva V et al (2020) Preclinical comparison of superpulse thulium fiber laser and a holmium:YAG laser for lithotripsy. World J Urol 38(2):497–503 Petzold R, Suarez-Ibarrola R, Miernik A (2021) Temperature assessment of a novel pulsed thulium solid-state laser compared with a holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser. J Endourol 35(6):853–859 Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2019) The laser of the future: reality and expectations about the new thulium fiber laser-a systematic review. Transl Androl Urol 8(Suppl 4):S398–S417