Trial reportWorld journal of urology2024
A comparison between vapor tunnel and virtual basket for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones using holmium:YAG laser (Cyber Ho): which is the best tool to reduce retropulsion?
Trial report in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of thulium fiber and holmium: YAG lasers on retropulsion and stone migration in ureteroscopic lithotripsy: real-world data.Lasers in medical science · 2025Article
- Old versus new tools to reduce retropulsion of proximal ureteral stones: virtual basket versus Magneto technology pulse modulation, which is the most effective?World journal of urology · 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
- Steady-state versus burst lasing techniques for thulium fiber laser.World journal of urology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare vapor tunnel (VT) and virtual basket (VB) tools to reduce retropulsion in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones.
methodsPatients with a single proximal ureteral stone were randomly assigned to holmium laser lithotripsy with the use of VT (Group A) or VB (Group B) tool. The 150W holmium:YAG cyber Ho generator was used. We compared operative time, dusting time, need for flexible ureteroscopy due to stone push-up and occurrence of ureteral lesions. The stone-free rate (SFR) and the occurrence of postoperative ureteral strictures were assessed.
results186 patients were treated, of which 92 with the VT (49.5%, Group A) and 94 with the VB (50.5%, Group B). Mean stone size was 0.92 vs. 0.91 cm in Groups A vs. B (p = 0.32). Mean total operative time and dusting time were comparable between groups. 7 (7.6%) vs. 6 (6.4%) patients in Groups A vs. B required a flexible ureteroscope because of stone push-up (p = 0.12). Ureteral mucosa lesions were observed in 15 (16.3%) vs. 18 (19.1%) cases in the VT vs. VB group (p = 0.09). 1-Month SFR was comparable (97.8% vs. 95.7%, p = 0.41). We observed one case (1.1%) of postoperative ureteral stricture in the VT group vs. two cases (2.1%) in the VB group (p = 0.19).
conclusionsVT and VB are equally safe and effective tools in reducing retropulsion of ureteral stones. Operative time, dusting time and SFR were comparable. They also equally avoided stone push-up and prevented ureteral lesions, which may later occur in ureteral strictures.
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.