ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Comparison of TFL and high-power Ho: YAG lasers with multiple pulse modulations: an in vitro study.
Article in World journal of urology, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the stone ablation volume (AV) achieved by thulium fiber laser (TFL) and high-power Holmium: YAG (Ho: YAG) lasers with MOSES™, Virtual Basket™ (VB™), Vapor Tunnel™ (VT™), and Magneto pulse-modulation technologies in an artificial stone model.
methodsBegoStone phantoms (15:6 "powder-to-water" ratio) were used. A motorized arm applied the laser at a constant speed (0.7 mm/s). Laser settings included 1.5 J × 5 Hz, 1 J × 20 Hz, and 0.3 J × 50 Hz, with five 21-mm cuts per setting. AV was calculated from width and depth measurements using an optical microscope. ANOVA was performed.
resultsAmong 750 measurements, TFL-200 μm achieved the highest AV in most settings. At 1.5 J x 5 Hz, TFL-200 μm (15.9 mm³) significantly outperformed MOSES™ (LP: 11 mm³, SP: 10.4 mm³, MD: 9.7 mm³) and Magneto (9.1 mm³) (p < 0.05). At 1 J × 20 Hz, TFL-200 μm (21.2 mm³) exceeded all technologies (p < 0.001). At 0.3 J x 50 Hz, TFL-200 μm (8.9 mm³) outperformed MOSES™ MD (3.8 mm³) and Magneto (4.9 mm³), p < 0.05. TFL-150 μm showed comparable AV to Ho: YAG lasers across settings, except at 1 J x 20 Hz, where it was lower than TFL-200 μm and CyberHo150 SP and VT™ (p < 0.05), primarily due to lower depth of fissure (DOF) while width of fissure (WOF) remained comparable. At 0.3 J × 50 Hz, TFL-150 μm (6.7 mm³) demonstrated lower AV than CyberHo150 SP (10.9 mm³; p = 0.003), but higher AV than MOSES™ MD (3.8 mm³; p = 0.034).
conclusionsTFL-200 μm achieved higher AV than Ho: YAG in most settings, but statistical significance was observed in one-third of comparisons. TFL-150 μm demonstrated similar AV to Ho: YAG, except in cases where Ho: YAG had higher DOF. TFL-150 μm has known advantages in terms of irrigation, visibility, ureteroscope tip deflection, and potential for miniaturization of flexible ureteroscopy devices and aspiration methods, supporting its potential applicability for dusting strategies while maintaining comparable AV.
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.