The laser of the future: reality and expectations about the new thulium fiber laser-a systematic review.
Inventions
laser
lithotripsy
systematic review
thulium
urinary calculi
Journal
Translational andrology and urology
ISSN: 2223-4691
Titre abrégé: Transl Androl Urol
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101581119
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
entrez:
29
10
2019
pubmed:
28
10
2019
medline:
28
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser has been the gold-standard for laser lithotripsy over the last 20 years. However, recent reports about a new prototype thulium fiber laser (TFL) lithotripter have revealed impressive levels of performance. We therefore decided to systematically review the reality and expectations for this new TFL technology. This review was registered in the PROSPERO registry (CRD42019128695). A PubMed search was performed for papers including specific terms relevant to this systematic review published between the years 2015 and 2019, including already accepted but not yet published papers. Additionally, the medical sections of ScienceDirect, Wiley, SpringerLink, Mary Ann Liebert publishers, and Google Scholar were also searched for peer-reviewed abstract presentations. All relevant studies and data identified in the bibliographic search were selected, categorized, and summarized. The authors adhered to PRISMA guidelines for this review. The TFL emits laser radiation at a wavelength of 1,940 nm, and has an optical penetration depth in water about four-times shorter than the Ho:YAG laser. This results in four-times lower stone ablation thresholds, as well as lower tissue ablation thresholds. As the TFL uses electronically-modulated laser diodes, it offers the most comprehensive and flexible range of laser parameters among laser lithotripters, with pulse frequencies up to 2,200 Hz, very low to very high pulse energies (0.005-6 J), short to very long-pulse durations (200 µs up to 12 ms), and a total power level up to 55 W. The stone ablation efficiency is up to four-times that of the Ho:YAG laser for similar laser parameters, with associated implications for speed and operating time. When using dusting settings, the TFL outperforms the Ho:YAG laser in dust quantity and quality, producing much finer particles. Retropulsion is also significantly reduced and sometimes even absent with the TFL. The TFL can use small laser fibers (as small as 50 µm core), with resulting advantages in irrigation, scope deflection, retropulsion reduction, and (in)direct effects on accessibility, visibility, efficiency, and surgical time, as well as offering future miniaturization possibilities. Similar to the Ho:YAG laser, the TFL can also be used for soft tissue applications such as prostate enucleation (ThuFLEP). The TFL machine itself is seven times smaller and eight times lighter than a high-power Ho:YAG laser system, and consumes nine times less energy. Maintenance is expected to be very low due to the durability of its components. The safety profile is also better in many aspects, i.e., for patients, instruments, and surgeons. The advantages of the TFL over the Ho:YAG laser are simply too extensive to be ignored. The TFL appears to be a real alternative to the Ho:YAG laser and become a true game-changer in laser lithotripsy. Due to its novelty, further studies are needed to broaden our understanding of the TFL, and comprehend the full implications and benefits of this new technology, as well its limitations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31656746
doi: 10.21037/tau.2019.08.01
pii: tau-08-S4-S398
pmc: PMC6790412
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
S398-S417Informations de copyright
2019 Translational Andrology and Urology. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
Lasers Surg Med. 2018 Apr;50(4):333-339
pubmed: 29266385
J Biomed Opt. 2014 Dec;19(12):128001
pubmed: 25518001
Open Med. 2011;5(1):e65-6
pubmed: 22046223
J Endourol. 2011 Apr;25(4):667-72
pubmed: 21381958
Vopr Kurortol Fizioter Lech Fiz Kult. 1985 Jul-Aug;(4):65-8
pubmed: 2865852
Urology. 2014 Dec;84(6):1301-7
pubmed: 25432821
Lasers Surg Med. 2002;30(3):184-90
pubmed: 11891737
Curr Opin Urol. 2003 May;13(3):249-53
pubmed: 12692450
J Endourol. 2015 Feb;29(2):235-9
pubmed: 25154455
J Biomed Opt. 2018 Jul;23(7):1-9
pubmed: 29981222
J Endourol. 1999 Oct;13(8):559-66
pubmed: 10597125
J Endourol. 2016 Nov;30(S2):P1-A464
pubmed: 27820662
BMC Urol. 2017 Aug 31;17(1):71
pubmed: 28859618
J Biomed Opt. 2011 Jul;16(7):071403
pubmed: 21806249
J Endourol. 2015 Oct;29 Suppl 1:P1-A457
pubmed: 26418525
Front Surg. 2017 Sep 29;4:57
pubmed: 29067287
J Endourol. 2019 Jan;33(1):16-21
pubmed: 30489154
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Curr Urol Rep. 2018 May 17;19(6):45
pubmed: 29774438
Lasers Surg Med. 2010 Mar;42(3):232-6
pubmed: 20333745
Br J Urol. 1988 Jun;61(6):487-9
pubmed: 2900041
J Urol. 2018 Jan;199(1):66-73
pubmed: 28818526
Biomed Opt Express. 2018 Aug 30;9(9):4552-4568
pubmed: 30615704
J Endourol. 2017 Sep;31(S2):P1-A474
pubmed: 28876971
BJOG. 2012 Jul;119(8):903-5
pubmed: 22703418
Surg Endosc. 1989;3(1):7-10
pubmed: 2565606
Lasers Surg Med. 2019 Aug;51(6):522-530
pubmed: 30648761
Cent European J Urol. 2015;68(2):175-82
pubmed: 26251737
Lasers Surg Med. 2005 Jul;37(1):53-8
pubmed: 15971236
J Biomed Opt. 2016 Jan;21(1):18003
pubmed: 26784588
World J Urol. 2015 Apr;33(4):479-85
pubmed: 25712309
Curr Opin Urol. 2019 Mar;29(2):103-107
pubmed: 30407221
Prog Urol. 1995 Apr;5(2):175-92
pubmed: 7536527
Arch Esp Urol. 2008 Nov;61(9):1111-4
pubmed: 19140594
Fed Regist. 1996 Oct 7;61(195):52602-62
pubmed: 10168287
Lasers Surg Med. 2006 Sep;38(8):762-72
pubmed: 16868932
J Endourol. 2018 Jan;32(1):1-6
pubmed: 29061070
World J Urol. 2015 Oct;33 Suppl 1:1-256
pubmed: 26391482
Lasers Med Sci. 2017 Sep;32(7):1507-1516
pubmed: 28669067
J Endourol. 2016 Apr;30(4):422-7
pubmed: 26561361
Urol Clin North Am. 1988 Aug;15(3):369-75
pubmed: 2900567
Urology. 1995 Jun;45(6):947-52
pubmed: 7771028
J Biomed Opt. 2017 Jan 1;22(1):18001
pubmed: 28301635
Prog Urol. 2015 Nov;25(13):751
pubmed: 26544267
BMC Urol. 2018 Oct 12;18(1):87
pubmed: 30314492
J Urol. 2017 Sep;198(3):663-670
pubmed: 28456634
J Endourol. 2016 Mar;30(3):332-7
pubmed: 26472513
J Urol. 1988 Jun;139(6):1272-4
pubmed: 2897477
Lasers Surg Med. 1992;12(4):353-63
pubmed: 1386643
J Endourol. 2016 Dec;30(12):1269-1274
pubmed: 27733053
J Endourol. 2016 May;30(5):574-9
pubmed: 26837810
Nat Rev Urol. 2018 Sep;15(9):563-573
pubmed: 29884804
Eur Urol. 2012 Apr;61(4):783-95
pubmed: 22285403
Curr Urol Rep. 2017 Apr;18(4):32
pubmed: 28271355
Br J Hosp Med. 1988 Sep;40(3):172-8
pubmed: 2975520
Can J Urol. 2018 Jun;25(3):9313-9316
pubmed: 29900818
Lasers Surg Med. 1991;11(2):141-51
pubmed: 2034011
Appl Opt. 2002 Sep 20;41(27):5797-803
pubmed: 12269579
Syst Rev. 2012 Feb 09;1:5
pubmed: 22587962
Expert Rev Med Devices. 2006 Jan;3(1):81-94
pubmed: 16359255
Urologiia. 2018 Dec;(5):74-80
pubmed: 30575354
Int J Urol. 2018 Mar;25(3):206-211
pubmed: 29205507
J Endourol. 2017 Oct;31(10):1067-1072
pubmed: 28728505
Urologiia. 2018 Mar;(1):112-120
pubmed: 29634144
J Endourol. 2017 Dec;31(12):1308-1312
pubmed: 29048216
J Biophotonics. 2017 Oct;10(10):1240-1249
pubmed: 27507305
J Biomed Opt. 2013 Feb;18(2):28001
pubmed: 23377013
J Endourol. 2018 May;32(5):417-423
pubmed: 29430969
Lasers Surg Med. 1999;25(1):22-37
pubmed: 10421883
Clin Laser Mon. 1994 Sep;12(9):139-41
pubmed: 10147497
J Endourol. 1998 Apr;12(2):183-6
pubmed: 9607447
Lancet. 1990 Apr 14;335(8694):891-4
pubmed: 1969991
J Endourol. 1995 Oct;9(5):383-6
pubmed: 8580937
World J Urol. 2020 Aug;38(8):1883-1894
pubmed: 30729311
Eur Urol. 2004 Jan;45(1):58-64
pubmed: 14667517
J Biomed Opt. 2013 Mar;18(3):038001
pubmed: 23455966
J Biomed Opt. 2019 Mar;24(3):1-10
pubmed: 30915783
Int Urol Nephrol. 2018 May;50(5):819-823
pubmed: 29574627
J Endourol. 2018 Jan;32(1):59-63
pubmed: 29048226
J Urol. 2016 May;195(5):1606-1612
pubmed: 26523881
Urologe A. 1985 Nov;24(6):310-2
pubmed: 2868556
Lasers Surg Med. 2010 Jan;42(1):45-50
pubmed: 20077487
Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol. 2013 Aug;22(4):200-9
pubmed: 23808367
Urology. 2017 May;103:47-51
pubmed: 28089885
World J Urol. 2016 Oct;34(Suppl 1):1-248
pubmed: 27644230
J Biomed Opt. 2013 Jul;18(7):078001
pubmed: 23817762
BJU Int. 1999 Jul;84(2):204-11
pubmed: 10444153
Actas Urol Esp. 2006 Oct;30(9):879-95
pubmed: 17175928
Urology. 2017 Sep;107:37-42
pubmed: 28647563
J Endourol. 2017 Dec;31(12):1313
pubmed: 29141454
World J Urol. 2015 Apr;33(4):463-9
pubmed: 25185524
Biomed Tech (Berl). 1985 Jul-Aug;30(7-8):173-81
pubmed: 2864963
Lasers Surg Med. 2015 Jul;47(5):403-10
pubmed: 25872759
Urology. 2018 Nov;121:51-57
pubmed: 30053397
J Endourol. 2015 Oct;29(10):1110-4
pubmed: 26167738
World J Urol. 2018 Oct;36(Suppl 1):1-380
pubmed: 30284601
J Endourol. 1995 Jun;9(3):255-8
pubmed: 7550269
World J Urol. 2017 Oct;35(Suppl 1):1-360
pubmed: 29051965