A scoping review of the clinical efficacy and safety of the novel thulium fiber laser: The rising star of laser lithotripsy.
Journal
Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada
ISSN: 1911-6470
Titre abrégé: Can Urol Assoc J
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101312644
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2021
Feb 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
4
8
2020
medline:
4
8
2020
entrez:
4
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser is the gold standard for intracorporeal lithotripsy. Preclinical reports suggest the thulium laser fibre (TFL) may possess advantages over the Ho:YAG laser, including improved lithotripsy efficacy, enhanced safety, and lower costs. Although the TFL is well-characterized in-vitro, there are no reviews examining TFL lithotripsy in a clinical setting. A review of the literature was conducted using a systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, and Embase, yielding a total of 130 manuscripts published up to May 2020. Two independent reviewers selected studies for screening, eligibility, and inclusion into the scoping review. Following the title, abstract, and full-text review, 14 articles were analyzed. Within these articles, there were 13 prospective cohort studies and one case series. The average sample size was 100 participants. Study followup durations ranged from four weeks to three months. TFL had comparable stone-free rates to Ho:YAG lasers and improved operating time. TFL was subjectively favorable in terms of stone retropulsion, stone fragmentation, endoscopic maneuverability, and endoscopic visibility. TFL appeared clinically safe and did not result in any major complications. Many studies were underpowered and non-peer-reviewed, demonstrating the need for additional research in this field. The TFL has the potential to catalyze a paradigm shift in laser lithotripsy. While the objective of this scoping review was to describe the contemporary landscape of the literature, it is important to consider that inferences posed by the studies described herein must be tempered by the low quality of available evidence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32744995
pii: cuaj.6804
doi: 10.5489/cuaj.6804
pmc: PMC7864720
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
56-66Références
Curr Opin Urol. 2020 Jan;30(1):24-29
pubmed: 31724998
Lasers Surg Med. 1994;14(3):258-68
pubmed: 8208052
Eur Urol. 2009 May;55(5):1190-6
pubmed: 18571315
World J Urol. 2020 Dec;38(12):3069-3074
pubmed: 32108256
Curr Opin Urol. 2020 Mar;30(2):144-148
pubmed: 31895890
J Urol. 2014 Feb;191(2):376-80
pubmed: 24018242
Eur Urol. 2012 Jul;62(1):160-5
pubmed: 22498635
Urologiia. 2018 Mar;(1):112-120
pubmed: 29634144
Urol Res. 2012 Aug;40(4):383-7
pubmed: 22006504
World J Urol. 2015 Apr;33(4):463-9
pubmed: 25185524
Appl Opt. 1973 Mar 1;12(3):555-63
pubmed: 20125343
Curr Urol Rep. 2018 May 17;19(6):45
pubmed: 29774438
Lasers Surg Med. 2019 Aug;51(6):522-530
pubmed: 30648761
Lasers Surg Med. 2005 Jul;37(1):53-8
pubmed: 15971236
Eur Urol. 2008 Feb;53(2):382-89
pubmed: 17566639
Nat Rev Urol. 2018 Sep;15(9):563-573
pubmed: 29884804
Urologiia. 2019 Jul;(3):72-79
pubmed: 31356016
J Endourol. 2001 Apr;15(3):257-73
pubmed: 11339391
World J Urol. 2020 Aug;38(8):1883-1894
pubmed: 30729311
Kidney Int. 2005 Oct;68(4):1808-14
pubmed: 16164658