Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Urolithiasis 1/2023

01-12-2023 | Research

Use of Moses 2.0 with extended frequency and optimized Moses vs. high-power laser in MiniPCNL: a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Esteban Emiliani, Andres Koey Kanashiro, Josep Balaña, Sofía Fontanet, Julia Aumatell, Julio Calderón-Cortez, Juan Iregui-Parra, Antoni Sanchez-Pui, Francisco Sanchez-Martin, Felix Millan, Oriol Angerri

Published in: Urolithiasis | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of the study was to compare standard high-power laser (with < 80 Hz) to extended frequency (> 100 Hz) lithotripsy during miniPCNL. 40 patients were randomized in to two groups undergoing MiniPCNL. For both groups, the Holmium Pulse laser Moses 2.0 (Lumenis) was used. For group A, standard high-power laser with < 80 Hz, with Moses distance was set using up to 3 J. For Group B, extended frequency (100–120 Hz) was used allowing up to 0.6 J. All patients underwent MiniPCNL using an 18 Fr balloon access. Demographics were comparable between groups. Mean stone diameter was 19 mm (14–23) with no differences between groups (p = 0.14). Mean operative time was 91 and 87 min for group A and B (p = 0.71), mean laser time was similar in both groups, 6.5 min and 7.5 min, respectively (p = 0.52) as well as the number of laser activations during the surgery (p = 0.43). Mean Watts used was 18 and 16 respectively being similar in both groups (p = 0.54) as well as the total KJoules (p = 0.29). Endoscopic vision was good in all surgeries. The endoscopic and radiologic stone free rate was achieved in all patients expect for two in both groups (p = 0.72). Two Clavien I complications were seen, a small bleeding for group A and a small pelvic perforation in group B. The use of high-power holmium laser with extended frequency and optimized Moses was effective and safe being comparable to standard high-power laser for MiniPCNL allowing more versatility with the setting range.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Wright HC, Sherman Z, Monga M, De S (2020) The role of laser in percutaneous surgery. Is this the best option for this approach? Arch Esp Urol 73(8):753–766PubMed Wright HC, Sherman Z, Monga M, De S (2020) The role of laser in percutaneous surgery. Is this the best option for this approach? Arch Esp Urol 73(8):753–766PubMed
4.
go back to reference Rice P, Somani BK (2022) Percutaneous laser nephrolithotripsy: is it here to stay? Results of a systematic review. Curr Opin Urol 32(2):185–191CrossRefPubMed Rice P, Somani BK (2022) Percutaneous laser nephrolithotripsy: is it here to stay? Results of a systematic review. Curr Opin Urol 32(2):185–191CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Manzo BO, Torres JE, Cabrera JD, Lozada E, Emiliani E, Sepulveda F, Morales C, Morales I, Sanchez HM (2021) Simplified biplanar (0–90°) fluoroscopic puncture technique for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the learning curve. World J Urol 39(9):3657–3663CrossRefPubMed Manzo BO, Torres JE, Cabrera JD, Lozada E, Emiliani E, Sepulveda F, Morales C, Morales I, Sanchez HM (2021) Simplified biplanar (0–90°) fluoroscopic puncture technique for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: the learning curve. World J Urol 39(9):3657–3663CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Thomas K, Smith NC, Hegarty N, Glass JM (2011) The Guy’s stone score–grading the complexity of percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures. Urology 78(2):277–281CrossRefPubMed Thomas K, Smith NC, Hegarty N, Glass JM (2011) The Guy’s stone score–grading the complexity of percutaneous nephrolithotomy procedures. Urology 78(2):277–281CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Zhu W, Liu Y, Liu L, Lei M, Yuan J, Wan SP, Zeng G (2015) Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis 43(6):563–570CrossRefPubMed Zhu W, Liu Y, Liu L, Lei M, Yuan J, Wan SP, Zeng G (2015) Minimally invasive versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a meta-analysis. Urolithiasis 43(6):563–570CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Ruhayel Y, Tepeler A, Dabestani S, MacLennan S, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Türk C, Yuan Y, Knoll T (2017) Tract sizes in miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a Systematic Review from the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol 72(2):220–235CrossRefPubMed Ruhayel Y, Tepeler A, Dabestani S, MacLennan S, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Türk C, Yuan Y, Knoll T (2017) Tract sizes in miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a Systematic Review from the European Association of Urology Urolithiasis Guidelines Panel. Eur Urol 72(2):220–235CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Pauchard F, Ventimiglia E, Corrales M, Traxer O (2022) A Practical Guide for Intra-Renal Temperature and Pressure Management during Rirs: What Is the Evidence Telling Us. J Clin Med 11(12):3429CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Pauchard F, Ventimiglia E, Corrales M, Traxer O (2022) A Practical Guide for Intra-Renal Temperature and Pressure Management during Rirs: What Is the Evidence Telling Us. J Clin Med 11(12):3429CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Doizi S, Uzan A, Keller EX, De Coninck V, Kamkoum H, Barghouthy Y, Ventimiglia E, Traxer O (2021) Comparison of intrapelvic pressures during flexible ureteroscopy, mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy, standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in a kidney model. World J Urol 39(7):2709–2717CrossRefPubMed Doizi S, Uzan A, Keller EX, De Coninck V, Kamkoum H, Barghouthy Y, Ventimiglia E, Traxer O (2021) Comparison of intrapelvic pressures during flexible ureteroscopy, mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy, standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy, and endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery in a kidney model. World J Urol 39(7):2709–2717CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Haddad M, Emiliani E, Rouchausse Y, Coste F, Doizi S, Berthe L, Butticé S, Somani B, Traxer O (2017) Impact of the Curve Diameter and Laser Settings on Laser Fiber Fracture. J Endourol 31(9):918–921CrossRefPubMed Haddad M, Emiliani E, Rouchausse Y, Coste F, Doizi S, Berthe L, Butticé S, Somani B, Traxer O (2017) Impact of the Curve Diameter and Laser Settings on Laser Fiber Fracture. J Endourol 31(9):918–921CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Use of Moses 2.0 with extended frequency and optimized Moses vs. high-power laser in MiniPCNL: a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Esteban Emiliani
Andres Koey Kanashiro
Josep Balaña
Sofía Fontanet
Julia Aumatell
Julio Calderón-Cortez
Juan Iregui-Parra
Antoni Sanchez-Pui
Francisco Sanchez-Martin
Felix Millan
Oriol Angerri
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Urolithiasis / Issue 1/2023
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Electronic ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-023-01443-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Urolithiasis 1/2023 Go to the issue