35 43

Cited 0 times in

Cited 0 times in

Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium Laser for Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Authors
 Ahn, Hyun Kyu  ;  Jeong, Jae Yong  ;  Moon, Young Joon  ;  Kang, Dong Hyuk  ;  Jung, Hae Do  ;  Kim, Lawrence  ;  Kim, Kwang Hyun  ;  Lee, Joo Yong 
Citation
 MEDICINA-LITHUANIA, Vol.62(4), 2026-03 
Article Number
 644 
Journal Title
MEDICINA-LITHUANIA
ISSN
 1010-660X 
Issue Date
2026-03
MeSH
Humans ; Lasers, Solid-State* / standards ; Lasers, Solid-State* / therapeutic use ; Lithotripsy* / methods ; Lithotripsy, Laser* / instrumentation ; Lithotripsy, Laser* / methods ; Thulium* / therapeutic use ; Treatment Outcome ; Ureteroscopy* / instrumentation ; Ureteroscopy* / methods
Keywords
ureteroscopy ; lithotripsy ; laser ; urolithiasis ; thulium ; Holmium ; meta-analysis
Abstract
Background and Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of the Thulium fiber laser (TFL) and Holmium:Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Ho:YAG) laser for ureteroscopic lithotripsy, considering the distinct technical characteristics of these two systems. Materials and Methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines and PROSPERO registration (CRD42023461573), a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted through August 2025. We included randomized controlled trials and non-randomized comparative studies comparing TFL and Ho:YAG laser in patients undergoing ureteroscopic management for urolithiasis. The primary outcomes were the stone-free rate (SFR) and complication rates (intraoperative and postoperative). Results: Thirteen studies involving 2217 patients were included. Overall, the TFL group demonstrated a significantly higher SFR compared to the Ho:YAG group (OR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.20-2.06, p = 0.001). In subgroup analysis, TFL showed superior SFR compared to Ho:YAG without pulse modulation (OR = 1.69, p = 0.01) and comparable efficacy to Ho:YAG with pulse modulation (OR = 1.52, p = 0.24). Regarding safety, no significant difference was observed in the intraoperative complication rate (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.35-1.70, p = 0.52) or the postoperative complication rate (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.65-1.60, p = 0.93) between the two groups. Conclusions: TFL provides a superior SFR compared to the Ho:YAG laser overall, a benefit primarily driven by its significant outperformance of standard Ho:YAG systems without pulse modulation. Importantly, TFL demonstrates comparable efficacy to modern Ho:YAG systems equipped with pulse modulation. The safety profile of TFL, including intraoperative and postoperative complications, is comparable to that of the Ho:YAG laser. Our findings suggest that TFL is a highly effective and safe modality for ureteroscopic lithotripsy, offering distinct advantages over standard Ho:YAG lasers while performing comparably to the latest pulse-modulated systems.
Files in This Item:
92782.pdf Download
DOI
10.3390/medicina62040644
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Urology (비뇨의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers
Yonsei Authors
Lee, Joo Yong(이주용) ORCID logo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3470-1767
URI
https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/212249
사서에게 알리기
  feedback

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse

Links