ReviewBJU international2025
Recommendation on the use of protective eyewear in endourological laser procedures.
Review in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis work examines the current evidence available regarding the risks of eye injury in endourology laser environments with the aim of providing a consensus recommendation on the appropriate use of protective eyewear.
methodsA working group was set up consisting of urological surgeons and laser protection advisors. A literature review was conducted to identify articles relevant to endourology practice and the commonly used lasers, and these were reviewed by the working group. Searches of the medical device fault/reporting databases were also undertaken. A consensus was developed and shared with stakeholders.
resultsNo reports of eye injuries from Ho:YAG, Tm:YAG, or Thulium Fibre Lasers (TFLs) were identified, although reports of skin burns and equipment-related fires were found. Available evidence suggests that ocular risks in endourology from these lasers are minimal and limited to rare cases of reversible corneal damage. Protective eyewear can further reduce this risk. However, Lasers with wavelengths below 1400 nm pose significant ocular risks, including blindness.
conclusionPersonnel working in an endourology environment using Ho:YAG, Tm:YAG, or TFLs face minimal ocular risks when adhering to established safety procedures, and laser-specific eyewear may not always be essential. This requires an understanding of the hazards and risks and is in accordance with the recommendations herein, which should form the basis for relevant local rules. Protective eyewear remains critical when using visible and near-infrared lasers due to the heightened associated ocular risks.
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.