ArticleUrolithiasis2026
Fiber-to-stone distance and fragment size with holmium laser lithotripsy.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Control of fragment size during laser lithotripsy has taken on increasing importance with adoption of ureteroscopic aspiration technologies. The objective of this study was to characterize the relationship between laser-fiber-to-stone distance (FSD) and the size of stone fragments produced when using Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy with fragmentation settings. Brushite crystalline aggregate model stones were treated with Ho:YAG laser with MOSES™ distance (MD) and short pulse (SP) modes. A 200 μm laser fiber was positioned at 0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, or 2.0 mm above the stone surface. Pulsed laser energy (0.8 J x 10 Hz) was delivered continuously while the fiber was automatically translated through a predetermined grid of points to cover the entire stone surface. Multiple passes were performed until ≥ 50% of each stone was ablated. Stone fragments were passed through sequential sieves to separate the fragments into size ranges of 2–4, 1–2, 0.5-1, and 0.25–0.5 mm. A statistically significant inverse relationship between FSD and the distribution of fragment sizes was discovered when using MD mode. For example, the risk of creating a fragment > 1 mm with FSD of 0 mm was approximately 4, 7, 27, and 27 times greater than FSD of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 mm respectively. With SP mode there was no statistical difference in fragment size distribution for any FSD tested. This discovery has potential impact on laser lithotripsy techniques and provides motivation for technological developments to measure (and better manage) FSD during laser lithotripsy.
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.