Plasma bubble formation induced by holmium laser: an in vitro study

Cecchetti, W.; Zattoni, Filiberto; Nigro, F; Tasca, A.

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2003.09.010

Cited by 32 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8,9 The Swiss Lithoclast fragments the stones by oscillatory movements of metal probe against the stones. 10 The thermal effect produced by Ho: YAG laser pulses are owing to creation of microscopic vaporization bubbles. The rapid implosion of the bubble at the tip of the fiber creates a shock wave which breaks the stones.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pneumatic Lithotripsy Versus Laser Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

versus laser lithotripsy for ureteral stones. AbstractIntroduction: Several different modalities are available for ureteral stone fragmentation. From them pneumatic and holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho: YAG) lithotripsy have supportive outcomes. In this study we studied 250 subjects who had ureteroscopic pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) or laser lithotripsy (LL). Methods: Two-hundred fifty patients with ureteral stones underwent ureteroscopic lithotripsy (115 subjects in the PL group, 135 subjects in the LL group) from August 2010 to April 2016. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate stone-free rate (SFR), mean operation time (MOT), mean hospital stay (MHS), stone migration and complications. Results: Two groups were similar in age, gender, mean size of stones, side of stone, and complications. There was a statistical difference in terms of SFR, stone migration and MHS in favor of the LL group (P ≤ 0.05, P ≤ 0.05 respectively), and MOT in favor of the PL group (P ≤ 0.05). Conclusion: Both the PL and LL techniques were effective and safe for ureteral stones, however a slightly higher SFR was found in the LL group.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pneumatic Lithotripsy Versus Laser Lithotripsy for Ureteral Stones

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This was confirmed by other authors who showed that HoLEP is equally efficient with LP [ 11 , 12 , 16 ]. The ‘in-vitro’ study by Cecchetti et al [ 13 ] was able to clearly document the interplay of different holmium laser settings and the effect of generated temperatures and shockwaves on soft tissues. They demonstrated that the lowest threshold for plasma formation and shockwave noise for soft tissue ablation was observed at an energy level of 1.4 J and frequency of 10 Hz.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does power setting impact surgical outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pirola

Castellani

Maggi

et al. 2022

Cent european J Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The aim of this article was to enumerate the differences in immediate and postoperative outcomes for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) performed with low-power (LP) or high-power (HP) laser settings through a systematic review of comparative studies. Material and methods We performed a systematic literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Controlled Register of Trials. Potential clinical differences among LP and HP HoLEP were determined using the PICOS (Patient Intervention Comparison Outcome Study type) model, where outcomes were surgical time, operative efficiency, postoperative catheterization time, length of hospital stay, blood transfusion, incontinence rate, maximum urinary flow rate (QMax) and International Prostatic Symptom score (IPSS). Retrospective, prospective nonrandomized, randomized studies, and meeting abstracts were considered. Results A total of five studies were included for meta-analysis. No significant differences between LP and HP HoLEP were evidenced in terms of intraoperative variables (surgical time, surgical efficiency); postoperative outcomes (length of stay, length of catheterization); postoperative complications; functional results (IPSS; Qmax). Urinary incontinence rate did not differ between the two groups (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.362.47, p = 0.91). Conclusions The study shows equal outcomes in outcomes from HoLEP performed with LP or HP energy settings. Even if further comparative studies are still needed to increase the level of evidence, those results encourage a further clinical adoption of LP HoLEP.

show abstract

“…Cecchetti also noted that an adequate distance is necessary from the baskets and guidewires present in the urinary tract to avoid damage. 10 Canales et al reviewed the data on fURS repairs of their systems from 2000 to 2004. They had 324 repairs: 30% involved the distal part of the scopes, and 4% were repairs to the objective lens, C-cover, and cover glass.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%