ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2025
Optimal stone density for ablation lithotripsy with vapor tunnel Ho:YAG pulse modality.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Thulium Fiber Laser versus Vapor Tunnel HO:YAG laser in retrograde intrarenal surgery: which one has better laser ablation performance?World journal of urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVapor-Tunnel™ (VT) consists of a very long pulse that uses the minimum peak power, causing the energy to pass through a previously created vapor channel or tunnel. There are studies that have shown acceptable ablation lithotripsy efficiency. Nevertheless, there are no in-vivo studies that have compared the VT performance according to the stone density.
methodsA retrospective study of 152 patients who underwent RIRS using VT Ho:YAG laser was performed. We divided the patients according to the stone density (Group 1: < 1000UH vs. Group 2: > 1000UH). We assessed the lithotripsy efficiency (mm
resultsNinety three patients were included in Group 1 and 59 in Group 2. Body mass index was higher in Group 1 and the median stone volume was higher in Group 2 (846 vs. 672 mm
conclusionsVT Ho:YAG was associated with decreased laser time, operative time and laser-energy consumption in Group 1 than Group 2. Similarly, VT Ho:YAG increased lithotripsy efficiency and the SFR compared to hard stones with the same laser settings and pulse modality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39560858What 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.