Pulse-modulated Holmium:YAG Laser vs the Thulium Fiber Laser for Renal and Ureteral Stones: A Single-center Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial
Christopher R. Haas, Margaret Knoedler, Shuang Li, Daniel R. Gralnek, Sara L. Best, Kristina L. Penniston, Stephen Y. Nakada
Abstract
PURPOSE: We sought to compare the clinical effectiveness of the pulse-modulated Ho:YAG (holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet) laser and the thulium laser fiber for ureteroscopic stone management in a randomized clinical trial. The primary outcome was the ureteroscope time required to adequately fragment stones to 1 mm or less. Secondary outcomes were stone-free rate, complications, subjective surgeon measurement of laser performance, patient related stone quality of life outcomes, and measurements of laser efficiency. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Institutional Review Board-approved randomized clinical trial was conducted to randomize patients to outpatient treatment with either the Moses 2.0 or thulium laser fiber in a 1:1 manner after stratification into groups based on the maximal diameter of treated stone (3-9.9 mm or 10-20 mm). Patient, stone, and operative parameters were compared using the appropriate categorical/continuous and parametric/nonparametric statistical tests (SPSS 25). RESULTS: = .60), or within subgroup analysis by stone size, median Hounsfield units, or stone location. There were no significant differences observed in the stone-free rate and complications rate between the 2 lasers. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized clinical trial suggests no significant clinical advantage of one laser technology over the other. Surgeon and institutional preference are the best approach when selecting one or the other.