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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |