SynthesisWorld journal of urology2026
Thulium fiber laser versus holmium: YAG laser for ureteroscopic lithotripsy of ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visibly Transparent, Near-Infrared Absorbing Nanofluids Enable High-Efficiency and Safe Laser Lithotripsy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- RIRS outcomes of conventional and pulse-modulated Ho:YAG lasers versus thulium fiber laser: a multinomial matching analysis.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
OBJECTIVE/
backgroundTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of TFL and Ho: YAG laser in URL for Ureteral Stones.
methodsAn electronic search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TFL and Ho: YAG under URL for ureteral stones was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science (WOS), and Cochrane Library to retrieve relevant studies published from inception to March 21, 2025. Meta-analysis was conducted with software RevMan 5.4.1. The Protocol number is CRD420251021727 ( www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO ).
results5 RCTs comprised of 441 patients were included. The TFL group had a higher Stone-free rate (SFR) (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06, P = 0.02, analyzed with fixed-effects model) with acceptable heterogeneity (I
conclusionTFL with URL showed significantly higher SFR and shorter operative times than Ho: YAG without increasing complications (Clavien I-III), it also reduced severe retropulsion (grade 2, Likert scale). Nonetheless, these conclusions should be validated through high-quality RCTs with a large sample.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41806030What 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.