Comparative Study between Pneumatic and Holmium Laser Lithotripsy in Treatment of Ureteric Stones

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Esmat ◽  
Karim Omar Elsaeed ◽  
Moataz Bellah Mohamed Adel
Keyword(s):  
Operating Time ◽  
Laser Lithotripsy ◽  
Early Postoperative Period ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Ureteral Stones ◽  
Pneumatic Lithotripsy ◽  
Randomized Clinical Study ◽  
Holmium Laser Lithotripsy ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy & safety of holmium laser and pneumatic lithotripsy used in the ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral stones. Materials and Methods A prospective randomized clinical study was done using the data of patients to whom ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URL) was applied for ureter stones in our clinic. Then these patients were separated into 2 groups according to the type of lithotriptor used in stone fragmentation as laser lithotripsy (Group 1) and pneumatic lithotripsy (Group 2). Results Statistically, the two groups were similar in respect of the number of stones, stone burden and the number of double J stents applied intra-operatively. Mean operating time was calculated as 62.9 (±7.69) minutes in Group 1 and 50.98 (±6.63) minutes in Group 2. The mean operating time was found to be higher in group 1 than group 2 (P = 0.000). On postoperative day 1 after the URL, the SFR of Group 1 79.0% found to be significantly high compared to the SFR of Group 2 (64.0%) (P = 0.019), while at postoperative month 1, the SFR of both groups (Group 1 84%, Group 2 80%) was found to be similar (P = 0.462). Conclusions Compared to the pneumatic lithotripter, the Ho: YAG laser seems to have a statistically significant higher SFR in the early postoperative period (1 day), even though there are statistically insignificant success rate (after 1 month) and complications (hematuria, mucosa injury, stone migration, stricture and perforation avulsion).

scholarly journals Laser Versus Pneumatic Lithotripsy With Semi-Rigid Ureteroscope; A Comparative Randomized Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-188
Author(s):  
Seyed Mohammadreza Rabani ◽  
Seyedhossein Rabani ◽  
Najmeh Rashidi
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Study ◽  
Laser Lithotripsy ◽  
Ureteral Stones ◽  
Female Ratio ◽  
Pneumatic Lithotripsy ◽  
Extracorporeal Shock Wave ◽  
Academic Center ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Introduction: Ureteral stones are among the most common disorders in the urologic field. Miniaturization of endoscopic devices in urology and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) has revolutionized the management of ureteral stones. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and results of laser versus pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) with semi-rigid ureteroscope in a randomized prospective clinical trial in removing stones. Methods: 117 adult patients underwent transurethral lithotripsy (TUL) in a single academic center and by a single surgeon. The patients were randomized in 2 groups: In group 1, 58 patients with ureteral stones underwent ureteroscopy and stone fragmentation was done by Ho: YAG laser lithotripsy (LL) and in group 2, 59 patients underwent PL (Swiss LithoClast) by using the same ureteroscope. Results: Mean age was 41.77 years and 41.1years in group one and 2 respectively (P=0.79), there was no significant difference in male to female ratio and mean stone in both groups. The success rate for stone clearance was 79.31% and 77.96% in group 1 and 2 respectively (P=0.52). No difference between complications was seen in both groups, but the duration of operations was different (significantly lower in group 2). Conclusion: In both techniques, acceptable results were achieved. We have found a significant statistical difference in duration of operation between our results (P=0.001) and similar studies, while this was shorter in the pneumatic group in our study, it was longer in other similar ones. This might be a result of more experience in working with PL in our center.

Design of Holmium Laser Treatment Instrument Control System

2011 ◽  
Vol 311-313 ◽  
pp. 1417-1420
Author(s):  
You Jie Zhou ◽  
Chun Hua Xiong ◽  
Chang Bo Lu
Keyword(s):  
Image Recognition ◽  
Kidney Stone ◽  
Laser Lithotripsy ◽  
Holmium Laser ◽  
Manual Control ◽  
Ureteral Stones ◽  
The Core ◽  
Holmium Laser Lithotripsy ◽  
Instrument Control ◽  
Design Ideas

Based on current market of the holmium laser lithotripsy device power by manual control, the image recognition technology are presented by which are used in the stone therapy. ,in this paper，the core circuit, the external circuit and image recognition part of the circuit and software are discussed, and the corresponding Design ideas and programs is given. The system which can not only generate reliably, practically, high intelligently, but also can be widely applied to the treatment of ureteral stones, bladder stones and kidney stone.

scholarly journals Comparative evaluation of intracorporeal lithotripsy techniques during ureteroscopy: a clinical experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 3581
Author(s):  
Pankaj Trivedi
Keyword(s):  
Migration Rate ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Laser Lithotripsy ◽  
Female Ratio ◽  
Pneumatic Lithotripsy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Stone Migration ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Background: The objective of the study was to compare pneumatic lithotripsy and laser lithotripsy techniques for safety, efficacy, and complications in the management of ureteric stone.Methods: Patients underwent ureteroscopy for ureteral stones in a tertiary care teaching hospital were divided into 2 groups of 50 each. Group 1 patients underwent pneumatic lithotripsy and group 2 underwent holmium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet (Ho: YAG) laser lithotripsy. Both the groups were compared regarding demographic characteristics, stone dimensions, number of stones, operative time, stone migration rate, application of post-operative double J (DJ) stent, complications, and stone free rate.Results: Mean age of the patients in the group 1, and group 2 were 45.74±18.49, and 44.5±14.33 years, respectively (p=0.709). There was no significant difference in male to female ratio in both groups. Total operative times were found 29.12±10.83 min, and 28.44±7.49 min in the group 1 and group 2, respectively which was statistically non-significant (p=0.716). The stone free rate was 100% and 98% in group 1 and 2 respectively (p=0.130). Stone migration was also found in 5 (10%) patients in the group 1 and 1 (2%) in group 2 which was found statistically significant (p=0.037). Mucosal damage was found 3 (6%) in laser group as compared to 1 (2%) in pneumatic group. No significant difference between complications was seen in both the groups.Conclusions: This study concluded that pneumatic lithotripsy and laser lithotripsy have similar efficacy in terms of operative time, success rate and hospital stay time. However, stone migration rate was significantly more in pneumatic lithotripsy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document