Cargando…

Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital

INTRODUCTION: Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation [flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURSL)] has risen over the last two decades. Laser technology has also evolved over the time, shifting from low- to high-power lasers with the addition of MOSES technology that allows for ‘dusting...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pietropaolo, Amelia, Mani, Mriganka, Hughes, Thomas, Somani, Bhaskar K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9149605/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35651485
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17562872221097345
_version_ 1784717236899938304
author Pietropaolo, Amelia
Mani, Mriganka
Hughes, Thomas
Somani, Bhaskar K.
author_facet Pietropaolo, Amelia
Mani, Mriganka
Hughes, Thomas
Somani, Bhaskar K.
author_sort Pietropaolo, Amelia
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation [flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURSL)] has risen over the last two decades. Laser technology has also evolved over the time, shifting from low- to high-power lasers with the addition of MOSES technology that allows for ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ of stones. The aim of the study was to look at the outcomes of FURSL in lower pole stones (LPS) using low- and high-power lasers. PATIENT AND METHODS: In this study, we compared the outcomes of low-power holmium laser (group A, 20 W) and high-power holmium laser (group B, including both 60 W MOSES integrated system and 100 W lasers) for all patients with LPS treated with laser lithotripsy. Data were collected for patient demographics, stone location, size, pre- and postoperative stent, length of stay, complications and stone free rate (SFR). RESULTS: A total of 284 patients who underwent FURSL procedure for LPS were analysed (168 group A, 116 group B). Outcomes showed that compared with group A, group B had a higher SFR (91.6% versus 96.5%, p = 0.13) and shorter operative time (52 versus 38 min, p < 0.001). The median length of stay was <24 h in all groups (day-case procedures). The complication rate was comparable between the two groups but with more infectious complications (n = 7) noted in group A compared with group B (n = 3) (p = 0.53). CONCLUSION: Compared with low-power laser, the use of high-power laser for LPS significantly reduced the use of ureteral access sheath (UAS), postoperative stent and procedural time. Although non-statistically significant, the SFR was higher in the high-power group even for relatively larger stone sizes, which was also reflected in a reduction of sepsis-related complication rates with these lasers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9149605
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91496052022-05-31 Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital Pietropaolo, Amelia Mani, Mriganka Hughes, Thomas Somani, Bhaskar K. Ther Adv Urol Minimally invasive techniques for the management of kidney and ureteral stone disease: challenges and solutions INTRODUCTION: Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation [flexible ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy (FURSL)] has risen over the last two decades. Laser technology has also evolved over the time, shifting from low- to high-power lasers with the addition of MOSES technology that allows for ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ of stones. The aim of the study was to look at the outcomes of FURSL in lower pole stones (LPS) using low- and high-power lasers. PATIENT AND METHODS: In this study, we compared the outcomes of low-power holmium laser (group A, 20 W) and high-power holmium laser (group B, including both 60 W MOSES integrated system and 100 W lasers) for all patients with LPS treated with laser lithotripsy. Data were collected for patient demographics, stone location, size, pre- and postoperative stent, length of stay, complications and stone free rate (SFR). RESULTS: A total of 284 patients who underwent FURSL procedure for LPS were analysed (168 group A, 116 group B). Outcomes showed that compared with group A, group B had a higher SFR (91.6% versus 96.5%, p = 0.13) and shorter operative time (52 versus 38 min, p < 0.001). The median length of stay was <24 h in all groups (day-case procedures). The complication rate was comparable between the two groups but with more infectious complications (n = 7) noted in group A compared with group B (n = 3) (p = 0.53). CONCLUSION: Compared with low-power laser, the use of high-power laser for LPS significantly reduced the use of ureteral access sheath (UAS), postoperative stent and procedural time. Although non-statistically significant, the SFR was higher in the high-power group even for relatively larger stone sizes, which was also reflected in a reduction of sepsis-related complication rates with these lasers. SAGE Publications 2022-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9149605/ /pubmed/35651485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17562872221097345 Text en © The Author(s), 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Minimally invasive techniques for the management of kidney and ureteral stone disease: challenges and solutions
Pietropaolo, Amelia
Mani, Mriganka
Hughes, Thomas
Somani, Bhaskar K.
Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital
title Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital
title_full Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital
title_fullStr Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital
title_full_unstemmed Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital
title_short Role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital
title_sort role of low- versus high-power laser in the treatment of lower pole stones: prospective non-randomized outcomes from a university teaching hospital
topic Minimally invasive techniques for the management of kidney and ureteral stone disease: challenges and solutions
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9149605/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35651485
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/17562872221097345
work_keys_str_mv AT pietropaoloamelia roleoflowversushighpowerlaserinthetreatmentoflowerpolestonesprospectivenonrandomizedoutcomesfromauniversityteachinghospital
AT manimriganka roleoflowversushighpowerlaserinthetreatmentoflowerpolestonesprospectivenonrandomizedoutcomesfromauniversityteachinghospital
AT hughesthomas roleoflowversushighpowerlaserinthetreatmentoflowerpolestonesprospectivenonrandomizedoutcomesfromauniversityteachinghospital
AT somanibhaskark roleoflowversushighpowerlaserinthetreatmentoflowerpolestonesprospectivenonrandomizedoutcomesfromauniversityteachinghospital