ArticleLasers in surgery and medicine2026
Soft Tissue Safety Assessment of Pulsed Solid-State Thulium:YAG Versus Holmium:YAG Lasers: A Quantitative Porcine Model Simulation.
Article in Lasers in surgery and medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLaser lithotripsy carries an inevitable risk of collateral tissue injury. This study compared the safety profiles of pulsed Holmium:YAG and Thulium:YAG lasers by examining their effects on soft tissue under laser settings relevant to lithotripsy, using ex vivo porcine kidney models.
methodsDirect laser impacts were applied to porcine renal parenchyma and pelvis at constant fiber movements and clinical laser settings (0.2-3.5 J, 10-40 Hz, 2-40 W), with high-power extensions for the Thulium:YAG laser up to 80 W/200 Hz. From 560 histological sections, coagulation and cutting depths were measured and clustered.
resultsAt equivalent power, the Thulium:YAG laser operated with longer pulses than Holmium:YAG, reducing pulse energy per time (pulse power ≤ 3362 vs. ≤ 7777 W). Holmium:YAG laser produced deeper lacerations up to 9.3 mm in renal parenchyma, compared to 5.0 mm with the Thulium:YAG laser. In renal pelvis, maximal cut depth was 3.6 mm with Holmium:YAG-twice as that observed with the Thulium:YAG. While pulse power was a primary determinant for soft tissue damage, high frequencies (100-200 Hz) did not elevate it. Cluster analysis identified laser-specific damage profiles: Thulium:YAG favored coagulative damage at limited depths, whereas Holmium:YAG induced deep lacerations with limited coagulation and tissue detachment.
conclusionSoft tissue safety and complication risk depend on laser parameters and choice of technology. Reduced pulse powers maximize safety, instead pulse frequency seems safe to elevate for improved efficiency. At power levels beyond 20 W, Thulium:YAG benefited from longer pulses showing safer profiles, with shallower penetration and more reliable coagulation compared to Holmium:YAG.
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.