Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39249917›Full record

ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2024

Comparing thulium fiber versus high power holmium laser in bilateral same sitting retrograde intrarenal surgery for kidney stones: Results from a multicenter study.

Chu Ann Chai, Takaaki Inoue, Bhaskar Kumar Somani, Steffi Kar Kei Yuen, Deepak Ragoori, Nariman Gadzhiev, Yiloren Tanidir, Esteban Emiliani, Saeed Bin Hamri, Mohamed Amine Lakmichi and 10 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Chu Ann ChaiDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. chaichuann@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0001-8915-3617
Takaaki InoueDepartment of Urology, Hara Genitourinary Private Hospital, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6050-5452
Bhaskar Kumar SomaniDepartment of Urology, University Hospitals Southampton, NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6248-6478
Steffi Kar Kei YuenSH Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9956-1558
Deepak RagooriDepartment of Urology, Asian Institute of Nephrology & Urology, Irram Manzil Colony, Hyderabad, India.ORCID 0000-0002-6169-3002
Nariman GadzhievDepartment of Urology, Saint-Petersburg State University Hospital, Saint-Petersburg, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-6255-0193
Yiloren TanidirDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Marmara University, İstanbul, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-1607-5819
Esteban EmilianiDepartment of Urology, Fundacion Puigvert, Autónomos University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-4488-0022
Saeed Bin HamriDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, Ministry of the National Guard Health Affairs, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-3447-8400
Mohamed Amine LakmichiDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Mohammed the VIth of Marrakesh, Marrakesh, Morocco.ORCID 0000-0001-6150-3988
Vaddi ChandramohanDepartment of Urology, Preeti Urology and Kidney Hospital, Hyderabad, India.ORCID 0000-0002-2930-6404
Angelo NaselliIRCCS San Giuseppe Hospital, Multimedica, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3372-8068
Boyke SoebhaliDepartment of Urology, Abdul Wahab Sjahranie Hospital Medical Faculty, Muliawarman University, Samarinda, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-1628-3725
Mehmet Ilker GokceDepartment of Urology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-2370-548X
Azimdjon N TursunkulovUrology Division, AkfaMedline Hospital, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.ORCID 0000-0002-1400-178X
Fernando Ramón de Fata ChillónDepartment of Urology, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0636-5185
Ben Hall ChewDepartment of Urology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5315-0710
Olivier TraxerUrology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2459-3803
Daniele CastellaniDepartment of Urology, Sorbonne University, Tenon Hospital, AP-HP, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-7354-9190
Vineet GauharDepartment of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-3740-7141

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTraditionally, bilateral urolithiasis treatment involved staged interventions due to safety concerns. Recent studies have shown that same-sitting bilateral retrograde intrarenal surgery (SSB-RIRS) is effective, with acceptable complication rates. However, there's no clear data on the optimum laser for the procedure. This study aimed to assess outcomes of SSB-RIRS comparing thulium fiber laser (TFL) and high-power holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser in a multicenter real-world practice. MATERIALS AND

methodsRetrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing SSB-RIRS from January 2015 to June 2022 across 21 centers worldwide. Three months perioperative and postoperative outcomes were recorded, focusing on complications and stone-free rates (SFR).

resultsA total of 733 patients were included, with 415 in group 1 (Ho:YAG) and 318 in group 2 (TFL). Both groups have similar demographic and stone characteristics. Group 1 had more incidence of symptomatic pain or hematuria (26.5% vs. 10.4%). Operation and lasing times were comparable. The use of baskets was higher in group 1 (47.2% vs. 18.9%, p<0.001). Postoperative complications and length of hospital stay were similar. Group 2 had a higher overall SFR. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that age, presence of stone at the lower pole, and stone diameter were associated with lower odds of being stone-free bilaterally, while TFL was associated with higher odds.

conclusionsOur study shows that urologists use both lasers equally for SSB-RIRS. Reintervention rates are low, safety profiles are comparable, and single-stage bilateral SFR may be better in certain cases. Bilateral lower pole and large-volume stones have higher chances of residual fragments.

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiLasers, Solid-StateThuliumAdultAgedFemaleHumansLaser TherapyMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeThuliumEndoscopyLaserUreteroscopyUrinary tract stonesUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID39249917
PMCPMC11390269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.