Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40345994›Full record

SynthesisBJU international2025

Stone dust in endourology: a systematic review of its definition, management, and clinical impact.

Stefano Moretto, Alberto Quarà, Federico Zorzi, Alejandra Bravo-Balado, Aideen Madden, Johan Cabrera, Mariela Corrales, Luigi Candela, Steeve Doizi, Frederic Panthier and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BJU international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

11 authors.

Stefano MorettoService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Alberto QuaràService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Federico ZorziService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Alejandra Bravo-BaladoService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Aideen MaddenService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Johan CabreraService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Mariela CorralesService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1461-8464
Luigi CandelaService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Steeve DoiziService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Frederic PanthierService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3055-2984
Olivier TraxerService d'Urologie, AP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate and synthesise the existing literature on stone dust (DUST) in endourology, focusing on its definition, creation methods, and removal techniques.

methodsA comprehensive electronic literature search was conducted using the PubMed/Medline, Web Of Science, and Embase databases to identify reports published until October 2024. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. The outcomes assessed included the definition of DUST, the method by which DUST was created, and how it was removed, evaluating both in vitro and in vivo studies. The review also assessed the efficacy of different laser technologies, including holmium-yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser, thulium fibre laser (TFL), and pulsed thulium-YAG laser (p-Tm:YAG) laser, in generating DUST and their clinical relevance in stone management.

resultsThe systematic review identified 43 eligible studies, revealing significant variability in the definition and evaluation of DUST. Criteria for DUST ranged from sub-millimetre particle sizes to functional properties like floatability and aspiration capability. While Ho:YAG lasers remain widely used for stone dusting, emerging technologies such as TFL and p-Tm:YAG lasers have shown superior efficiency in producing finer particles and reducing retropulsion. No consensus emerged regarding the settings used by surgeons and the pre-settings provided by laser manufacturers.

conclusionsDespite the widespread use of dusting techniques in endourology, a standardised definition of DUST remains lacking, with significant variability in laser settings, particle sizes, and evacuation methods. It must be clarified whether DUST should be defined as a noun-representing a distinct entity with a precise definition-or as the result of the dusting process, in which case clear criteria are needed to characterise it accurately. Establishing standardised definitions and protocols through international consensus is crucial to optimising clinical outcomes and ensuring consistency in future research.

Indexed as

DustLithotripsy, LaserUrinary CalculiHumansLasers, Solid-StateDustDustDustingEndourologyLithiasisLithotripsyStone

Identifiers

PMID40345994
PMCPMC12256740

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.