Is "Kidney Stone Calculator" efficient in predicting ureteroscopic lithotripsy duration? A holmium:YAG and thulium fiber lasers comparative analysis.

Flexible ureteroscopy Holmium:YAG Kidney Stone Calculator Laser Lithotripsy Surgical planning Thulium fiber laser

Journal

World journal of urology
ISSN: 1433-8726
Titre abrégé: World J Urol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8307716

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
13 Apr 2024
Historique:
received: 21 11 2023
accepted: 26 02 2024
medline: 13 4 2024
pubmed: 13 4 2024
entrez: 13 4 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

This study aimed to evaluate the ability of Kidney Stone Calculator (KSC), a flexible ureteroscopy surgical planning software, to predict the lithotripsy duration with both holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) and thulium fiber laser (TFL). A multicenter prospective study was conducted from January 2020 to April 2023. Patients with kidney or ureteral stones confirmed at non-contrast computed tomography and treated by flexible ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy were enrolled. "Kidney Stone Calculator" provided stone volume and subsequent lithotripsy duration estimation using three-dimensional segmentation of the stone on computed tomography and the graphical user interface for laser settings. The primary endpoint was the quantitative and qualitative comparison between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations. Secondary endpoints included subgroup analysis (Ho:YAG-TFL) of differences between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations and intraoperative outcomes. Multivariate analysis assessed the association between pre- and intraoperative variables and these differences according to laser source. 89 patients were included in this study, 43 and 46 in Ho:YAG and TFL groups, respectively. No significant difference was found between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations (27.37 vs 28.36 min, p = 0.43) with a significant correlation (r =  + 0.89, p < 0.001). Among groups, this difference did not differ (p = 0.68 and 0.07, respectively), with a higher correlation between estimated and effective lithotripsy durations for TFL compared to Ho:YAG (r =  + 0.95, p < 0.001 vs r =  + 0.81, p < 0.001, respectively). At multivariate analysis, the difference was correlated with preoperative (volume > 2000 mm KSC is a reliable tool for predicting the lithotripsy duration estimation during flexible ureteroscopy for both Ho:YAG and TFL. However, some variables not including laser source may lead to underestimating this estimation.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-04906-5 PMID: 38613608
pubmed: 38613608
doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-04906-5
pii: 10.1007/s00345-024-04906-5
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

233

Subventions

Organisme : Association Française d'Urologie
ID : 2018

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Références

Scales CD, Smith AC, Hanley JM et al (2012) Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol 62:160–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.052
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.052 pubmed: 22498635 pmcid: 3362665
Stamatelou K, Goldfarb DS (2023) Epidemiology of Kidney Stones. Healthc Basel Switz 11:424. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11030424
doi: 10.3390/healthcare11030424
Brikowski TH, Lotan Y, Pearle MS (2008) Climate-related increase in the prevalence of urolithiasis in the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:9841–9846. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0709652105
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0709652105 pubmed: 18626008 pmcid: 2474527
Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K et al (2016) EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis. Eur Urol 69:475–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.07.041 pubmed: 26344917
Assimos D, Krambeck A, Miller NL et al (2016) Surgical management of stones: American Urological Association/Endourological Society Guideline, part I. J Urol 196:1153–1160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.090
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.05.090 pubmed: 27238616
Johnson DE, Cromeens DM, Price RE (1992) Use of the holmium:YAG laser in urology. Lasers Surg Med 12:353–363
doi: 10.1002/lsm.1900120402 pubmed: 1386643
Keller EX, De Coninck V, Doizi S et al (2021) Thulium fiber laser: ready to dust all urinary stone composition types? World J Urol 39:1693–1698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03217-9
doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03217-9 pubmed: 32363450
Panthier F, Doizi S, Illoul L et al (2021) Developing free three-dimensional software for surgical planning for kidney stones: volume is better than diameter. Eur Urol Focus 7:589–590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2020.06.003
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.06.003 pubmed: 32591284
Panthier F, Doizi S, Lapouge P et al (2021) Comparison of the ablation rates, fissures and fragments produced with 150 µm and 272 µm laser fibers with superpulsed thulium fiber laser: an in vitro study. World J Urol 39:1683–1691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03186-z
doi: 10.1007/s00345-020-03186-z pubmed: 32253581
Panthier F, Traxer O, Yonneau L et al (2021) Evaluation of a free 3D software for kidney stones’ surgical planning: “kidney stone calculator” a pilot study. World J Urol 39:3607–3614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03671-z
doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03671-z pubmed: 33779821 pmcid: 8006641
Peyrottes A, Chicaud M, Fourniol C et al (2023) Clinical reproducibility of the stone volume measurement: a “kidney stone calculator” study. J Clin Med 12:6274. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12196274
doi: 10.3390/jcm12196274 pubmed: 37834918 pmcid: 10573675
Panthier F (2019) fredericpanthier/SlicerKidneyStoneCalculator
Mekayten M, Lorber A, Katafigiotis I et al (2019) Will stone density stop being a key factor in endourology? The impact of stone density on laser time using lumenis laser p120w and standard 20 W laser: a comparative study. J Endourol 33:585–589. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0181
doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0181 pubmed: 31084375
Panthier F, Kutchukian S, Ducousso H et al (2023) How to estimate stone volume and its use in stone surgery: a comprehensive review. Actas Urol Esp S2173–5786(23):00107–00115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.08.009
doi: 10.1016/j.acuroe.2023.08.009
Ulvik Ø, Æsøy MS, Juliebø-Jones P et al (2022) Thulium fibre laser versus Holmium:YAG for ureteroscopic lithotripsy: outcomes from a prospective randomised clinical trial. Eur Urol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2022.02.027
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.02.027 pubmed: 35637042
Traxer O, Keller EX (2020) Thulium fiber laser: the new player for kidney stone treatment? A comparison with Holmium:YAG laser. World J Urol 38:1883–1894. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-019-02654-5
doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02654-5 pubmed: 30729311
Ventimiglia E, Traxer O (2019) Is very high power/frequency really necessary during laser lithotripsy? RE: understanding the popcorn effect during holmium laser lithotripsy for dusting (Aldoukhi et al, Urology. 2018 Dec;122:52–57). Urology 127:135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.01.032
doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2019.01.032 pubmed: 30794907
Sroka R, Pongratz T, Scheib G et al (2015) Impact of pulse duration on Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy: treatment aspects on the single-pulse level. World J Urol 33:479–485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-015-1504-9
doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1504-9 pubmed: 25712309
Uzan A, Chiron P, Panthier F et al (2021) Comparison of holmium:YAG and thulium fiber lasers on the risk of laser fiber fracture. J Clin Med 10:2960. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10132960
doi: 10.3390/jcm10132960 pubmed: 34209375 pmcid: 8268355
Ventimiglia E, Doizi S, Kovalenko A et al (2020) Effect of temporal pulse shape on urinary stone phantom retropulsion rate and ablation efficiency using holmium:YAG and super-pulse thulium fibre lasers. BJU Int 126:159–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.15079
doi: 10.1111/bju.15079 pubmed: 32277557
Corrales M, Traxer O (2021) Initial clinical experience with the new thulium fiber laser: first 50 cases. World J Urol 39:3945–3950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-021-03616-6
doi: 10.1007/s00345-021-03616-6 pubmed: 33590280
Kuroda S, Ito H, Sakamaki K et al (2018) A new prediction model for operative time of flexible ureteroscopy with lithotripsy for the treatment of renal stones. PLoS ONE 13:e0192597. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192597
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192597 pubmed: 29438410 pmcid: 5811000
Taratkin M, Laukhtina E, Singla N et al (2020) How lasers ablate stones: in vitro study of laser lithotripsy (Ho:YAG and Tm-fiber lasers) in different environments. J Endourol. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0441
doi: 10.1089/end.2019.0441 pubmed: 32597216
Liu Y, Claus S, Kerfriden P et al (2023) Model-based simulations of pulsed laser ablation using an embedded finite element method. Int J Heat Mass Transf 204:123843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2022.123843
doi: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2022.123843 pubmed: 36909718 pmcid: 10004101
Rippel CA, Nikkel L, Lin YK et al (2012) Residual fragments following ureteroscopic lithotripsy: incidence and predictors on postoperative computerized tomography. J Urol 188:2246–2251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.040
doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.08.040 pubmed: 23083650
Jiang P, Peta A, Brevik A et al (2022) Ex vivo renal stone dusting: impact of laser modality, ureteral access sheath, and suction on total stone clearance. J Endourol 36:499–507. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2021.0544
doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0544 pubmed: 34693735
Geavlete P, Mulţescu R, Geavlete B (2023) Re: application of suctioning ureteral access sheath during flexible ureteroscopy for renal stones decreases the risk of postoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Eur Urol 85:94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2023.08.020
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2023.08.020 pubmed: 37778953
Prot-Bertoye C, Daudon M, Tostivint I et al (2021) Cystinurie. Néphrologie Thérapeutique 17:S100–S107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nephro.2020.03.001
doi: 10.1016/j.nephro.2020.03.001
Sierra A, Corrales M, Kolvatzis M et al (2022) Thermal injury and laser efficiency with holmium YAG and thulium fiber laser—an in vitro study. J Endourol 36:1599–1606. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2022.0216
doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0216 pubmed: 35793107

Auteurs

Marie Chicaud (M)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France.
PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 151 bd de l'Hôpital, 75013, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, 2 avenue Martin Luther King, 87000, Limoges, France.

Stessy Kutchukian (S)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France.
PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 151 bd de l'Hôpital, 75013, Paris, France.
Department of Urology, Poitiers University Hospital, 2 Rue de la Milétrie, 86000, Poitiers, France.

Steeve Doizi (S)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France.
PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 151 bd de l'Hôpital, 75013, Paris, France.

François Audenet (F)

Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen George Pompidou, 20 rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France.

Laurent Berthe (L)

PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 151 bd de l'Hôpital, 75013, Paris, France.

Laurent Yonneau (L)

Université Versailles Saint-Quentin-Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Foch, 40 rue Worth, 92150, Suresnes, France.

Thierry Lebret (T)

Université Versailles Saint-Quentin-Service d'Urologie, Hôpital Foch, 40 rue Worth, 92150, Suresnes, France.

Marc-Olivier Timsit (MO)

Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen George Pompidou, 20 rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France.

Arnaud Mejean (A)

Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Européen George Pompidou, 20 rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France.

Luigi Candela (L)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France.
Division of Experimental Oncology/Unit of Urology, URI, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.

Catalina Solano (C)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France.
Department of Endourology, Uroclin SAS Medellin, Medellin, Colombia.

Mariela Corrales (M)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France.

Igor Duquesne (I)

Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Cochin, Université Paris Cité, 123 boulevard de Port-Royal, 75014, Paris, France.

Aurélien Descazeaud (A)

Service d'Urologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, 2 avenue Martin Luther King, 87000, Limoges, France.

Olivier Traxer (O)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France.
PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 151 bd de l'Hôpital, 75013, Paris, France.

Fréderic Panthier (F)

GRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France. fredericpanthier@gmail.com.
Service d'Urologie, Assistance-Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 4 rue de la Chine, 75020, Paris, France. fredericpanthier@gmail.com.
PIMM, UMR 8006 CNRS-Arts et Métiers ParisTech, 151 bd de l'Hôpital, 75013, Paris, France. fredericpanthier@gmail.com.
ORCID: 0000-0003-3055-2984

Classifications MeSH