ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Holmium: YAG laser enucleation of the prostate using the new cyber Ho generator with magneto technology: does it provide any advantages compared to thulium: YAG prostate enucleation?
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endoscopic management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma with laser ablation including Magneto pulse modulation.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Assessing the trifecta of enucleation using Magneto laser energy on different prostate volumes in real world practice, an EAU-endourology and AUSET collaboration.World journal of urology · 2026Observational
- Virtual basket mode in HoLEP: reduced early dysuria and faster continence recovery without loss of efficacy.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
- The Effect of Conventional Ho:YAG, Magneto Ho:YAG and Thulium Fiber Laser on Soft Tissue: An Ex Vivo Comparative Study in Porcine Kidney.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Does pulse modulation technology improve endoscopic enucleation of the prostate? Real-world comparison of three contemporary laser platforms in 447 patients.World journal of urology · 2026Observational
- Reply to letter to the editor for the Article " Mini-PCNL using the new cyber Ho with Magneto technology versus the standard cyber ho: are there any differences in the treatment of renal stones between 10 and 20 mm?"World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Old versus new tools to reduce retropulsion of proximal ureteral stones: virtual basket versus Magneto technology pulse modulation, which is the most effective?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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess differences in efficacy and safety between Thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) and enucleation performed with the Holmium:YAG Cyber Ho laser generator (HoLEP) with Magneto technology (Quanta System®).
methodsPatients with surgical indication for benign prostatic hyperplasia underwent ThuLEP using Cyber TM generator (Group A) versus HoLEP using Cyber Ho generator with Magneto technology (Group B). In Group A settings were 100W for enucleation and 35W for coagulation. In Group B early apical detachment and coagulation were performed with energy 1 J and frequency 30 Hz by applying Magneto technology. Enucleation was performed with energy 2 J and frequency 40 Hz by applying Virtual Basket pulse modulation.
results200 patients were enrolled (100 patients per group). Preoperative features were comparable. Mean prostate size was 78.9 vs. 80.5 ml in Group A vs. B (p = 0.09). Mean operative time was 70.6 vs. 64.3 min (p = 0.13) with mean enucleation time 48.8 vs. 43.7 min (p = 0.21) and morcellation time 21.2 vs. 14.6 min (p = 0.03) in ThuLEP vs. HoLEP group. Micturition improvements were comparable. Postoperative gross haematuria was significantly more frequent after ThuLEP and clots-induced urinary retention occurred in 5.0% of cases, compared to no cases after HoLEP (p = 0.02).
conclusionsHoLEP using the Cyber Ho generator with the application of Magneto technology for coagulation seems to provide an haemostatic advantage compared to ThuLEP, suggested by the significantly shorter morcellation time, higher morcellation efficiency and lower rate of postoperative gross haematuria and clots-induced urinary retention. Functional outcomes are comparable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40067530What 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.