Trial reportScientific reports2026
Low- versus high-power holmium: YAG laser strategies affect operative efficiency in suction-assisted mini-PCNL in a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Pulsed Thulium:Yag, Thulium Fiber, and Holmium:Yag Lasers in Mini-PCNL: A Three-Arm Comparative Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare operative efficiency and perioperative outcomes between low-power (LP) and high-power (HP) holmium: yttrium aluminum-garnet (Ho: YAG) laser strategies in suction-assisted mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), we conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial including 100 adult patients with renal calculi randomized 1:1 to LP (n = 50) or HP (n = 50) settings. All procedures were performed using suction-assisted mini-PCNL. The primary outcome was total operative time, with secondary outcomes including laser activation time, total laser energy, energy density, ablation speed, stone-free rate (SFR) at 6 weeks, and complications. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. The HP group demonstrated significantly shorter operative time (90.7 ± 18.7 vs. 112.1 ± 40.3 min; P = 0.001) and laser activation time (1893 ± 499 vs. 2548 ± 1001 s; P = 0.001). Although total energy delivery was higher in the HP group (37.6 vs. 25.1 kJ; P = 0.001), ablation speed was significantly greater (1.6 vs. 1.2 mm³/s; P = 0.002), while the LP group showed greater energy efficiency (10.9 vs. 16.4 J/mm³; P = 0.002). Six-week SFR (86.0% vs. 88.0%; P = 0.766), complication rates, and hospital stay were comparable. Within a suction-assisted mini-PCNL setting, HP Ho: YAG laser strategies were associated with improved operative efficiency, primarily reflected by shorter operative and lasing times, at the expense of lower energy efficiency, without differences in short-term clinical outcomes. These findings should be interpreted as reflecting differences in clinically applied laser strategies rather than isolated laser power effects.
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.