Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40341980›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of urology2025

High-frequency in laser lithotripsy: do we truly know what it means?

Alejandra Bravo-Balado, Stefano Moretto, Letizia Maria Ippolita Jannello, Alberto Quarà, Federico Zorzi, Stevee Doizi, Olivier Traxer, Frédéric Panthier

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Alejandra Bravo-BaladoEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France. alejandra.bravo146@gmail.com.
Stefano MorettoEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France.
Letizia Maria Ippolita JannelloEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France.
Alberto QuaràEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France.
Federico ZorziEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France.
Stevee DoiziEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France.
Olivier TraxerEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France.
Frédéric PanthierEndolase lab, GRC20, Sorbonne Université and PIMM-Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND

objectiveHigh frequency (HF) in laser lithotripsy lacks a consistent definition, potentially impacting clinical outcomes and patient safety. This review aims to analyze available evidence on the definition of HF. MATERIALS AND

methodsA comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases identified English-language studies published up to November 2024. Those mentioning HF focused on Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG), Thulium Fiber Laser (TFL), and pulsed Thulium:YAG (p-Tm:YAG) in ureteral and renal endoscopic procedures; in vitro experiments and reviews/editorials were also included. User manuals from high-power laser manufacturers, and data from artificial intelligence (AI) platforms were also analyzed.

resultsFrom 1030 initial records, 857 studies were screened after duplicate removal, and 106 studies were ultimately included. Most articles came from Europe (46), followed by North America (37) and Asia (20). HF was poorly defined in 25 articles, distributed across Europe (11), North America (7), and Asia (7). Most studies evaluated Ho:YAG (N = 80), followed by TFL (N = 13) and p-Tm:YAG (N = 1); the rest evaluated the first two lasers or all three. HF definitions varied, with European studies reporting ranges from 10 to 200 Hz, North American studies from 10 to 120 Hz, and Asian studies from 10 to 200 Hz. On average, HF ranged from 40 to 50 Hz. Among manufacturers, only four out of eight provided HF definitions in pre-setting/starting guidelines. AI platforms defined HF as 15-100 Hz for Ho:YAG, 50-2000 Hz for TFL, and 20-500 Hz for p-Tm:YAG.

conclusionsThere is no consensus on HF definitions in laser lithotripsy, with limited manufacturer guidelines and overly broad AI-defined ranges. Standardized terminology is essential. We propose defining HF as > 30 Hz for renal and > 15 Hz for ureteral procedures. Based on the available evidence, the use of HF settings does not appear to be necessary for dusting or popcorning techniques with current technologies.

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiLithotripsy, LaserHumansLasers, Solid-StateDustingFrequencyHigh FrequencyLaserUrinary stones

Identifiers

PMID40341980

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.