ArticleLasers in medical science2022
In vitro fragmentation performance of a novel, pulsed Thulium solid-state laser compared to a Thulium fibre laser and standard Ho:YAG laser.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06721975 (Prospective Single-center Study Comparing Thulium Fiber Laser to Pulsed Thulium), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prospective Single-center Study Comparing Thulium Fiber Laser to Pulsed Thulium:YAG Laser in the Ureteroscopic Treatment of Nephrolithiasis
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pulsed Thulium: YAG laser for the management of Urolothiasis: a systematic review from the EAU section of endourology.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Advances in lasers for the minimally invasive treatment of upper and lower urinary tract conditions: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2023Pooled it
- What to expect from the novel pulsed thulium:YAG laser? A systematic review of endourological applications.World journal of urology · 2023Pooled it
- When long pulse is not enough: inferior dusting efficiency of pulsed thulium:YAG compared with Ho:YAG and thulium fiber laser in a standardized in vitro renal model.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Flexible ureterorenoscopy and lithotripsy with pulsed thulium: YAG laser: a multicenter retrospective study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Pulsed solid-state thulium: YAG laser compared to holmium: YAG laser during mini-PCNL.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
- In vitro ablation rates of Ho:YAG, p-Tm:YAG and TFL lasers.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- In vitro comparative analysis of ablation volume and energy requirements for 1 mm³ stone ablation using ho: YAG, p-Tm: YAG, and TFL lasers.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Endoscopic treatment of renal and ureteral stones using the new Cyber Ho generator with Magneto technology: the first clinical experience from a multicenter study.World journal of urology · 2025Observational
- Thulium fiber laser versus pulsed Thulium:YAG for laser lithotripsy during flexible ureteroscopy.Lasers in medical science · 2024Article
- Flexible Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy with the Pulsed Thulium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Laser Thulio: Preliminary Results from a Prospective Study.European urology open science · 2024Article
- Pulsed Thulium:YAG laser - What is the lithotripsy ablation efficiency for stone dust from human urinary stones? Results from an in vitro PEARLS study.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Thulium:YAG laser: a good compromise between holmium:YAG and thulium fiber laser for endoscopic lithotripsy? A narrative review.World journal of urology · 2023Review
- Pulsed thulium:YAG laser-ready to dust all urinary stone composition types? Results from a PEARLS analysis.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Navigating urolithiasis treatment: assessing the practicality and performance of thulium fiber laser, holmium YAG, and thulium YAG in real-world scenarios.World journal of urology · 2023Review
- In Pursuit of the Optimal Dusting Settings with the Thulium Fiber Laser: AnJournal of endourology · 2023Article
- Prospective Comparison of Thulium and Holmium Laser Lithotripsy for the Treatment of Upper Urinary Tract Lithiasis.European urology open science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this work was to compare the fragmentation efficiency of a novel, pulsed Thulium solid-state laser (p-Tm:YAG) to that of a chopped Thulium fibre laser (TFL) and a pulsed Holmium solid-state laser (Ho:YAG). During the fragmentation process, we used a silicone mould to fixate the hemispherical stone models under water in a jar filled with room-temperature water. Each laser device registered the total energy applied to the stone model to determine fragmentation efficiency. Our study examined laser settings with single pulse energies ranging from 0.6 to 6 J and pulse frequencies ranging from 5 to 15 Hz. Similar laser settings were applied to explicitly compare the fragmentation efficiency of all three devices. We experimented with additional laser settings to see which of the three devices would perform best. The fragmentation performance of the three laser devices differed statistically significantly (p < 0.05). The average total energy required to fragment the stone model was 345.96 J for Ho:YAG, 372.43 J for p-Tm:YAG and 483.90 J for TFL. To fragment the stone models, both Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG needed similar total energy (p = 0.97). TFL's fragmentation efficiency is significantly lower than that of Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG. Furthermore, we found the novel p-Tm:YAG's fragmentation efficiency to closely resemble that of Ho:YAG. The fragmentation efficiency is thought to be influenced by the pulse duration. TFL's shortest possible pulse duration was considerably longer than that of Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG, resulting in Ho:YAG and p-Tm:YAG exhibiting better fragmenting efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.