ArticleUrology research & practice2025
Comparison of Temperature Changes Between Holmium-YAG Laser and Thulium Fiber Laser in an In Vitro Setting.
Article in Urology research & practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Thulium fiber laser versus holmium: YAG laser for ureteroscopic lithotripsy of ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Intrarenal thermal and pressure dynamics during ureteroscopy: an in vitro study.BJU international · 2026Article
- Smart Lithotripsy: Lasers, Energy Sources and Efficiency.Current urology reports · 2026Review
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
Objective: We aimed to evaluate and compare the rise in the temperature for the safety of the ureter and kidney parenchyma when firing the holmium laser and the thulium fiber laser (TFL). Methods: We performed a laboratory experiment to measure the rise in temperature upon firing holmium laser and a TFL in a 10 cm3 transparent test tube in an outdoor environment and then in a container with normal saline. Results: In a 10 cc test tube with static water at 25°C, the rise in temperature with holmium and TFL depends on the firing time, keeping power constant. On continuous firing for 10, 20, and 30 seconds, the temperature rose to 35.1, 42.7, and 53.2°C with holmium. The temperature went up to 38.3, 46.8, and 55.4°C when TFL was used. The power was kept at 10 W for both types of lasers. The temperature rise was relatively low when the test tube was immersed in a water container. It was even lower with irrigation. Conclusion: The rise in the temperature reaches to hazardous level in static water with a firing time of 30 seconds, which is almost equivalent to holmium and TFL. Thus, while using lasers in RIRS and ureteroscopy, the firing time should not exceed 20 seconds and adequate irrigation is required to prevent damage to the tissues. Also, the rise in temperature was almost equivalent to holmium and TFL; hence, TFL can be safely used in laser lithotripsy in any part of the genitourinary (GU) system.
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.