ArticleWorld journal of urology2022
Laser fiber degradation following holmium laser enucleation of the prostate utilizing Moses technology versus regular mode.
Article in World journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Next-Generation Moses Pulse Modulation: An Evaluation of Whether This Is Hype or Breakthrough.Cureus · 2025Review
- Current era HOLEP with MOSES 2.0 technology compared to the gold standard TURP.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Pulse modulation in En-Bloc HoLEP: does it really matter? A propensity score matched analysis.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- GeoBioMed perspectives on kidney stone recurrence from the reactive surface area of SWL-derived particles.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of surgical outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate using different energies.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe sought to objectively compare laser fiber degradation for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) cases performed with 550 μm standard fibers versus 550 μm Moses 2.0 fiber in BPH mode on a macroscopic and microscopic level.
methodsWe prospectively collected outcomes for 50 standardized HoLEP cases using 550 μm Moses fiber with 2.0 BPH mode compared to our historical cohort of 50 patients using 550 μm standard fibers on regular mode. Macroscopic degradation length was the difference in length of exposed fiber at the start and end of each case. Five consecutive 550 μm standard fibers, five 550 μm Moses fibers and their respective controls underwent novel utilization of three objective corroborating imaging techniques: Brightfield high resolution microscopy, high resolution 3-D microCT and Confocal Reflection Surface Analysis. Mann-Whitney U, 2-tailed T tests and Chi-squared tests were used.
resultsStandard fibers demonstrated greater degradation than the Moses fibers with 2.0 BPH mode [2.9 cm (IQR 1.7-4.3 cm) vs 0.2 cm (IQR 0.1-0.4 cm), p < 0.01]. This difference remained significant when comparing degradation per energy used, per minute enucleation and per gram enucleated (all p < 0.05). None of the cases with Moses fiber and 2.0 BPH mode required intraoperative interruption to re-strip the fiber. Objective fiber degradation by three microscopic techniques confirmed more damage to the standard fibers with regular mode.
conclusionOverall, use of the 550 μm Moses fiber with 2.0 BPH mode resulted in less fiber degradation compared to a standard 550 μm fiber with regular mode as confirmed using 4 corroborating macroscopic and microscopic techniques.
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.