ReviewCureus2025
A Comparative Evaluation of Holmium:YAG and Thulium Fiber Lasers in Urinary Stone Treatment.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Which is the best laser for ureteroscopy? A Comprehensive Review.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Laser lithotripsy has transformed the management of urinary stone disease, with Holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) long regarded as the standard of care. However, the emergence of the thulium fiber laser (TFL) has introduced a novel alternative with potential technical and clinical benefits. This review synthesizes data from randomized controlled trials and cohort studies published between 2019 and 2025 comparing Ho:YAG and TFL for urinary stone lithotripsy. A total of 13 peer-reviewed studies were included, with outcomes assessed across stone-free rates (SFRs), operative time, ablation efficiency, complication rates, and overall safety. While both lasers achieve comparable SFRs, several studies reported significantly higher clearance rates and shorter operative times with TFL. TFL was also associated with improved dusting performance, reduced retropulsion, and enhanced ergonomics due to its higher frequency and smaller fiber compatibility. Safety outcomes were similar, though some studies noted fewer bleeding events and greater fiber durability with TFL. These findings suggest that TFL may offer advantages over Ho:YAG in selected clinical settings. Although Ho:YAG remains the globally established modality, accumulating evidence supports the growing role of TFL in contemporary endourology, pending further long-term and cost-effectiveness data.
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.