ArticleLasers in medical science2023
Does Moses technology enhance the efficiency and outcomes of regular holmium laser lithotripsy? Results of a pooled analysis of comparative studies.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Outcomes of ureteroscopy and laser fragmentation using a 60 W MOSES laser: a 3-year prospective study from a University Teaching Hospital.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
- Comparison of ureteoroscopy and laser stone fragmentation between Holmium: YAG laser with MOSES versus non-MOSES technology: a prospective single-center propensity score-matched analysis using similar laser settings.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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Holmium laser lithotripsy is currently the optimum standard for surgical treatment of upper urinary calculi. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Moses compared with conventional holmium laser lithotripsy for the treatment of patients with upper urinary calculi. We conducted a systematic search using multiple databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov) until June 2022. Clinical trials comparing Moses and conventional holmium laser lithotripsy were included. Analysis was performed using RevMan version 5.4.4 software. Four studies with 892 patients were included. There were no significant differences regarding stone-free rate (mean difference [MD] 1.19, 95% CI 0.54, 2.64, p = 0.66), operative time (MD - 9.31, 95% CI - 21.11, 2.48, p = 0.12), fragmentation time (MD - 1.71, 95% CI - 11.81, 8.38, p = 0.74), total energy used (MD 1.23, 95% CI - 0.44, 2.90, p = 0.15), auxiliary procedures (MD 0.38, 95% CI 0.08, 1.90, p = 0.24), and overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.30, 1.66, p = 0.42) between the groups. However, the laser working time (MD - 0.94, 95% CI - 1.20, - 0.67, p < 0.001) of Moses technology was shorter than that of conventional technology. Moses technology has similar outcomes to regular technology in terms of safety and efficacy. Given the higher operating costs of the Moses technology, further study is required to determine whether there are benefits to this new technology.
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.