ArticleTrials2024
Clinical efficacy and safety of the superpulse thulium fiber laser and holmium laser for ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi: a randomized, positive control, blinded, single-center clinical study {1}.
Article in Trials, 2024. 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.
- Holmium laser lithotripsy and its effects on postoperative complications in urolithiasis.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of super-pulse thulium fiber laser compared to holmium: YAG laser for ureteral and renal stones: a multicenter retrospective study.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKidney stone disease is a common problem. The holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (HO:YAG) laser is currently the gold standard laser for ureterorenoscopic (URS) lithotripsy. Recently, the superpulse thulium fiber laser (SP TFL) has shown potential as a substitute for the HO:YAG laser. We aim to compare and evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of the HO:YAG laser and SP TFL in the treatment of upper urinary calculi in this trial.
methodsIn this randomized, positive control, blinded management, single-center clinical study, patients with upper urinary calculi will be randomized (1:1) to the experimental group (SP TFL group) or the control group (HO:YAG laser group). Patients in both groups will undergo URS lithotripsy under general anesthesia, and according to the results of randomization, the patients will be treated with an SP TFL (trial group) or a holmium laser (control group). The primary outcome is the stone-free rate at 30 ± 7 days after surgery. The secondary outcomes include the duration of surgery, the duration of laser use, the length of postoperative hospital stay, postoperative clinical indicators, total hospitalization costs, the second-stage stone clearance rate, perioperative complications, the average hemoglobin change, and the mean white blood cell count change. DISCUSSION: This study aims to evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and safety of the SP TFL and HO:YAG for URS lithotripsy in the treatment of upper urinary calculi. TRIAL REGISTRATION {2A AND 2B}: chictr.org.cn ChiCTR2300076893. Registered on October 24, 2023, with ChiCTR ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/bin/project/edit?pid=206827 ). PROTOCOL VERSION {3}: August 15, 2023 (V.20230815).
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.