Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Urolithiasis 4/2019

Open Access 01-08-2019 | Original Paper

Role of ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ using a high-powered (100 W) laser machine in the treatment of large stones (≥ 15 mm): prospective outcomes over 16 months

Authors: Amelia Pietropaolo, Patrick Jones, Lily Whitehurst, Bhaskar K. Somani

Published in: Urolithiasis | Issue 4/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Ureteroscopy and laser stone fragmentation (URSL) has had recent advancements with the more powerful laser systems with the ability to ‘dust’ and ‘pop-dust’ the stone. We wanted to look at the outcomes of this method for large stones (≥ 15 mm) using our new 100 W holmium laser. Over a period of 16 months (January 2017–April 2018), 50 patients underwent URSL for minimum cumulative stone size of ≥ 15 mm. Data were collected prospectively on patient and stone demographics and outcomes of URSL. The laser setting used was a power of 0.3–0.6 J and a frequency of 20–50 Hz using a long-pulse setting with a 272-µm fiber. Fifty patients underwent 55 URSL procedures (5 bilateral procedures) using dusting and pop-dusting settings. The mean age was 58 years (range 2–88 years) with a male:female ratio of 35:15. The mean single and overall stone size were 10.3 mm (3–23 mm) and 21 mm (range 15–52 mm) with two-thirds of all patients (65%) having multiple stones. The stone location was in the kidney (n = 65, 78%), in the ureter (n = 19, 22%) and 5 patients had bilateral renal stones. With a mean operating time of 51 min, the initial and final SFR were 93 and 98%, respectively. A pre-operative stent, access sheath and a post-operative stent were present in 29 (53%), 34 (62%) and 51 (93%) procedures, respectively. Over a mean hospital stay of 0.6 days (74% day-case procedures), there was one Clavien IV complication related to urosepsis but without any other major or minor complications. Dusting and pop-dusting techniques achieve an excellent SFR with low risk of complications even for large stones. This might set a new benchmark for treating large stones, bilateral or multiple stones in a single setting, without the need for secondary procedures in most cases.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Geraghty R, Jones P, Somani BK (2017) Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol 31(6):547–556CrossRefPubMed Geraghty R, Jones P, Somani BK (2017) Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades: a systematic review. J Endourol 31(6):547–556CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Chawla SN, Chang MF, Chang A et al (2008) Effectiveness of high-frequency holmium:YAG laser stone fragmentation: the pop corn effect. J Endourol 22:645CrossRefPubMed Chawla SN, Chang MF, Chang A et al (2008) Effectiveness of high-frequency holmium:YAG laser stone fragmentation: the pop corn effect. J Endourol 22:645CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Tracey J, Gagin G, Morhardt D et al (2018) Ureteroscopic high-frequency dusting utilising a 120-W holmium laser. J Endourol 32(4):290–295CrossRefPubMed Tracey J, Gagin G, Morhardt D et al (2018) Ureteroscopic high-frequency dusting utilising a 120-W holmium laser. J Endourol 32(4):290–295CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Humphreys MR, Shah OD, Monga M et al (2018) Dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy—which technique is more efficacious? A prospective multicenter trial from the EDGE research consortium. J Urol 199:1272–1276CrossRefPubMed Humphreys MR, Shah OD, Monga M et al (2018) Dusting versus basketing during ureteroscopy—which technique is more efficacious? A prospective multicenter trial from the EDGE research consortium. J Urol 199:1272–1276CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Matlaga BR, Chew B, Eisner B et al (2018) Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy: a review of dusting vs fragmentation with extraction. J Endourol 32(1):1–6CrossRefPubMed Matlaga BR, Chew B, Eisner B et al (2018) Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy: a review of dusting vs fragmentation with extraction. J Endourol 32(1):1–6CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Ghosh A, Oliver R, Way C et al (2007) Results of day-case ureterorenoscopy (DC-URS) for stone disease: prospective outcomes over 4.5 years. World J Urol 35(11):1757–1764CrossRef Ghosh A, Oliver R, Way C et al (2007) Results of day-case ureterorenoscopy (DC-URS) for stone disease: prospective outcomes over 4.5 years. World J Urol 35(11):1757–1764CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Somani BK, Desai M, Traxer O et al (2014) Stone free rate (SFR): a new proposal for defining levels of SFR. Urolithiasis 42(2):95CrossRefPubMed Somani BK, Desai M, Traxer O et al (2014) Stone free rate (SFR): a new proposal for defining levels of SFR. Urolithiasis 42(2):95CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Dindo D, Demartines N, Claiven PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg 2:205–213CrossRef Dindo D, Demartines N, Claiven PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg 2:205–213CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Gamal W, Mamdouh A (2015) Flexible URS holmium laser stone dusting vs fragmentation for 2 cm single renal stone. J Urol 193:e312–e313CrossRef Gamal W, Mamdouh A (2015) Flexible URS holmium laser stone dusting vs fragmentation for 2 cm single renal stone. J Urol 193:e312–e313CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Schatloff O, Lindner U, Ramon J et al (2010) Randomized trial of stone fragment active retrieval versus spontaneous passage during holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral stones. J Urol 183:1031CrossRefPubMed Schatloff O, Lindner U, Ramon J et al (2010) Randomized trial of stone fragment active retrieval versus spontaneous passage during holmium laser lithotripsy for ureteral stones. J Urol 183:1031CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Fahmy A, Youssif M, Rhashad H et al (2016) Extractable fragment versus dusting during ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in children: Prospective randomized study. J Pediatr Urol 12:254PubMed Fahmy A, Youssif M, Rhashad H et al (2016) Extractable fragment versus dusting during ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy in children: Prospective randomized study. J Pediatr Urol 12:254PubMed
13.
go back to reference Chew B, Shah O, Sur R et al (2016) Dusting vs basketing during ureteroscopic lithotripsy—which is more efficacious? Final results from the EDGE research consortium. J Urol 195:e407 Chew B, Shah O, Sur R et al (2016) Dusting vs basketing during ureteroscopic lithotripsy—which is more efficacious? Final results from the EDGE research consortium. J Urol 195:e407
14.
go back to reference Dauw CA, Simeon L, Alruwaily AF et al (2015) Contemporary practice patterns of flexible ureteroscopy for treating renal stones: results of a worldwide survey. J Endourol 29(11):1221–1230CrossRefPubMed Dauw CA, Simeon L, Alruwaily AF et al (2015) Contemporary practice patterns of flexible ureteroscopy for treating renal stones: results of a worldwide survey. J Endourol 29(11):1221–1230CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Geraghty RM, Ishii H, Somani BK (2016) Outcomes of flexible ureteroscopy and laser fragmentation for treatment of large renal stones with and without the use of ureteral access sheaths: results from a university hospital with a review of literature. Scand J Urol 50(3):216–219CrossRefPubMed Geraghty RM, Ishii H, Somani BK (2016) Outcomes of flexible ureteroscopy and laser fragmentation for treatment of large renal stones with and without the use of ureteral access sheaths: results from a university hospital with a review of literature. Scand J Urol 50(3):216–219CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Aldoukhi AH, Roberts WW, Hall TL et al (2017) Holmium laser lithotripsy in the new stone age: dust or bust? Front Surg 29:4:57CrossRef Aldoukhi AH, Roberts WW, Hall TL et al (2017) Holmium laser lithotripsy in the new stone age: dust or bust? Front Surg 29:4:57CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Wollin DA, Carlos EC, Tom WR (2018) Effect of laser settings and irrigation rates on ureteral temperature during holmium laser lithotripsy, an in vitro model. J Endourol 32(1):59–63CrossRefPubMed Wollin DA, Carlos EC, Tom WR (2018) Effect of laser settings and irrigation rates on ureteral temperature during holmium laser lithotripsy, an in vitro model. J Endourol 32(1):59–63CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Santiago JE, Hollander AB, Soni SD et al (2017) To dust or not to dust: a systematic review of ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy techniques. Curr Urol Rep 18(4):32CrossRefPubMed Santiago JE, Hollander AB, Soni SD et al (2017) To dust or not to dust: a systematic review of ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy techniques. Curr Urol Rep 18(4):32CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Ibrahim A, Badaan S, Elhilali MM et al (2018) Moses technology in a stone simulator. Can Urol Assoc J 12(4):127–130CrossRefPubMed Ibrahim A, Badaan S, Elhilali MM et al (2018) Moses technology in a stone simulator. Can Urol Assoc J 12(4):127–130CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Role of ‘dusting and pop-dusting’ using a high-powered (100 W) laser machine in the treatment of large stones (≥ 15 mm): prospective outcomes over 16 months
Authors
Amelia Pietropaolo
Patrick Jones
Lily Whitehurst
Bhaskar K. Somani
Publication date
01-08-2019
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Urolithiasis / Issue 4/2019
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Electronic ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-018-1076-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2019

Urolithiasis 4/2019 Go to the issue