ArticleUrolithiasis2025
Efficacy and safety of super-pulse thulium fiber laser compared to holmium: YAG laser for ureteral and renal stones: a multicenter retrospective study.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Complications of thulium fiber laser lithotripsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis by the EAU-YAU endourology and urolithiasis working group.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Thermal determinants during in situ lithotripsy of nonrelocatable impacted ureteral calculi using a flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath: an in vitro study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Article
- Thulium fiber laser versus high-power holmium laser for renal stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality studies.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To assess and compare the clinical effectiveness, operative efficiency, stone clearance, and perioperative safety of Super-Pulse Thulium Fiber Laser (SP-TFL) versus Holmium: YAG (Ho: YAG) laser in flexible ureteroscopic management of upper ureteral and renal stones. A multicenter retrospective analysis was performed including 297 patients treated with ureteroscopic lithotripsy between June 2023 and October 2024. Patients were stratified according to laser type: SP-TFL (n = 95) and Ho: YAG (n = 202). The primary endpoint was stone-free rate (SFR), while secondary measures included operative and lithotripsy times, postoperative complications classified by Clavien–Dindo, perioperative white blood cell (WBC) changes, and length of hospitalization. All analyses were conducted using R software. SP-TFL achieved a higher early SFR at 24–48 h compared with Ho: YAG (87.4% vs. 76.2%, P = 0.038), while one-month SFRs were similar (94.7% vs. 92.1%, P = 0.55). Operative (55 vs. 75 min) and lithotripsy times (30 vs. 50 min) were significantly shorter with SP-TFL (both P < 0.001). Hospital stay did not differ. The SP-TFL group had less postoperative WBC elevation and fewer overall complications (18.9% vs. 40.1%, P = 0.017), including fewer grade II events. Compared with Ho: YAG, SP-TFL was associated with reduced operative and lithotripsy times, higher early clearance, and fewer complications, while one-month SFR remained similar. Taken together, these findings suggest that SP-TFL may represent a more efficient and safer option for managing upper ureteral and renal stones in real-world clinical practice.
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.