Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting 2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Keep up to date with all the top stories and latest evidence with our hub page, including official congress videos and expert takeaways.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Urology
Published in: World Journal of Urology 6/2021

Open Access 01-06-2021 | Ureterorenoscopy | Topic Paper

Consultation on kidney stones, Copenhagen 2019: aspects of intracorporeal lithotripsy in flexible ureterorenoscopy

Authors: Søren Kissow Lildal, Kim Hovgaard Andreassen, Joyce Baard, Marianne Brehmer, Matthew Bultitude, Ylva Eriksson, Khurshid R. Ghani, Helene Jung, Guido Kamphuis, Peter Kronenberg, Ben Turney, Olivier Traxer, Øyvind Ulvik, Palle Jörn Sloth Osther

Published in: World Journal of Urology | Issue 6/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To summarize current knowledge on intracorporeal laser lithotripsy in flexible ureterorenoscopy (fURS), regarding basics of laser lithotripsy, technical aspects, stone clearance, lithotripsy strategies, laser technologies, endoscopes, and safety.

Methods

A scoping review approach was applied to search literature in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Consensus was reached through discussions at the Consultation on Kidney Stones held in September 2019 in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Results and conclusions

Lasers are widely used for lithotripsy during fURS. The Holmium laser is still the predominant technology, and specific settings for dusting and fragmenting have evolved, which has expanded the role of fURS in stone management. Pulse modulation can increase stone ablation efficacy, possibly by minimizing stone retropulsion. Thulium fibre laser was recently introduced, and this technology may improve laser lithotripsy efficiency. Small fibres give better irrigation, accessibility, and efficiency. To achieve optimal results, laser settings should be adjusted for the individual stone. There is no consensus whether the fragmentation and basketing strategy is preferable to the dusting strategy for increasing stone-free rate. On the contrary, different stone scenarios call for different lithotripsy approaches. Furthermore, for large stone burdens, all laser settings and lithotripsy strategies must be applied to achieve optimal results. Technology for removing dust from the kidney should be in focus in future research and development. Safety concerns about fURS laser lithotripsy include high intrarenal pressures and temperatures, and measures to reduce both those aspects must be taken to avoid complications. Technology to control these parameters should be targeted in further studies.
Literature
1.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2015a) Update on lasers in urology 2014: current assessment on holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser lithotripter settings and laser fibers. World J Urol 33(4):463–469PubMed
2.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2014a) The truth about laser fiber diameters. Urology 84(6):1301–1307PubMed
3.
Pasqui F, Dubosq F, Tchala K, Tligui M, Gattegno B, Thibault P et al (2004) Impact on active scope deflection and irrigation flow of all endoscopic working tools during flexible ureteroscopy. Eur Urol 45(1):58–64PubMed
4.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2014b) In vitro fragmentation efficiency of holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser lithotripsy—a comprehensive study encompassing different frequencies, pulse energies, total power levels and laser fibre diameters. BJU Int 114(2):261–267PubMed
5.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2013) V1718 laser fibers, pulse energy and retropulsion—what we can see and what we can’t. J Urol 189(4s):e707
6.
Kronenberg P, Somani B (2018) Advances in lasers for the treatment of stones-a systematic review. Curr Urol Rep 19(6):45PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Baghdadi M, Emiliani E, Talso M, Servián P, Barreiro A, Orosa A et al (2017) Comparison of laser fiber passage in ureteroscopic maximum deflection and their influence on deflection and irrigation: Do we really need the ball tip concept? World J Urol 35(2):313–318PubMed
8.
Carlos EC, Li J, Young BJ, Radvak D, Wollin DA, Winship BB et al (2019) Let’s get to the point: comparing insertion characteristics and scope damage of flat-tip and ball-tip holmium laser fibers. J Endourol 33(1):22–26PubMed
9.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2016a) Lithotripsy performance of specially designed laser fiber tips. J Urol 195(5):1606–1612PubMed
10.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2015b) Are we all doing it wrong? Influence of stripping and cleaving methods of laser fibers on laser lithotripsy performance. J Urol 193(3):1030–1035PubMed
11.
Aldoukhi AH, Knudsen BE, Black KM, Hall TL, Roberts WW, Ghani KR (2019) Are we cutting ourselves short? Laser lithotripsy performance based on differences in fiber-tip preparation. Urology 134(1):79–83PubMed
12.
Sea J, Jonat LM, Chew BH, Qiu J, Wang B, Hoopman J et al (2012) Optimal power settings for holmium:YAG lithotripsy. J Urol 187(3):914–919PubMed
13.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O (2016b) Ultra-short, short, medium and long-pulse laser lithotripsy performance. Eur Urol Suppl 15(3):e1035
14.
Sroka R, Pongratz T, Scheib G, Khoder W, Stief CG, Herrmann T et al (2015) Impact of pulse duration on Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy: treatment aspects on the single-pulse level. World J Urol 33(4):479–485PubMed
15.
Bader MJ, Pongratz T, Khoder W, Stief CG, Herrmann T, Nagele U et al (2015) Impact of pulse duration on Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy: fragmentation and dusting performance. World J Urol 33(4):471–477PubMed
16.
Elhilali MM, Badaan S, Ibrahim A, Andonian S (2017) Use of the Moses technology to improve holmium laser lithotripsy outcomes: a preclinical study. J Endourol 31(6):598–604PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Winship B, Wollin D, Carlos E, Li J, Peters C, Simmons WN et al (2018) Dusting efficiency of the Moses holmium laser: an automated in vitro assessment. J Endourol 32(12):1131–1135PubMed
18.
Aldoukhi AH, Roberts WW, Hall TL, Ghani KR (2019) Watch your distance: the role of laser fiber working distance on fragmentation when altering pulse width or modulation. J Endourol 33(2):120–126PubMed
19.
Hecht SL, Wolf JSJ (2013) Techniques for holmium laser lithotripsy of intrarenal calculi. Urology 81(2):442–445PubMed
20.
Chawla SN, Chang MF, Chang A, Lenoir J, Bagley DH (2008) Effectiveness of high-frequency holmium:YAG laser stone fragmentation: the “popcorn effect.” J Endourol 22(4):645–650PubMed
21.
Weiss B, Shah O (2016) Evaluation of dusting versus basketing—can new technologies improve stone-free rates? Nat Rev Urol 13(12):726–733PubMed
22.
Doizi S, Keller EX, De Coninck V, Traxer O (2018) Dusting technique for lithotripsy: what does it mean? Nat Rev Urol 15(11):653–654PubMed
23.
Aldoukhi AH, Roberts WW, Hall TL, Ghani KR (2017) Holmium laser lithotripsy in the new stone age: dust or bust? Front Surg 4:1–6
24.
Emiliani E, Talso M, Cho S-Y, Baghdadi M, Mahmoud S, Pinheiro H et al (2017) Optimal settings for the noncontact holmium:YAG stone fragmentation popcorn technique. J Urol 198(3):702–706PubMed
25.
Aldoukhi AH, Roberts WW, Hall TL, Teichman JMH, Ghani KR (2018) Understanding the popcorn effect during holmium laser lithotripsy for dusting. Urology 122:52–57PubMed
26.
Humphreys MR, Shah OD, Monga M, Chang Y-H, Krambeck AE, Sur RL 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(5):1272–1276PubMed
27.
Elbahnasy AM, Shalhav AL, Hoenig DM, Elashry OM, Smith DS, McDougall EM et al (1998) Lower caliceal stone clearance after shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy: the impact of lower pole radiographic anatomy. J Urol 159(3):676–682PubMed
28.
Inoue T, Murota T, Okada S, Hamamoto S, Muguruma K, Kinoshita H et al (2015) Influence of pelvicaliceal anatomy on stone clearance after flexible ureteroscopy and holmium laser lithotripsy for large renal stones. J Endourol 29(9):998–1005PubMed
29.
Jessen JP, Honeck P, Knoll T, Wendt-Nordahl G (2014) Flexible ureterorenoscopy for lower pole stones: influence of the collecting system’s anatomy. J Endourol 28(2):146–151PubMed
30.
Danilovic A, Rocha BA, Torricelli FCM, Marchini GS, Batagello C, Vicentini FC et al (2019) Size is not everything that matters: preoperative CT predictors of stone free after RIRS. Urology 132:63–68PubMed
31.
Kourambas J, Delvecchio FC, Munver R, Preminger GM (2000) Nitinol stone retrieval-assisted ureteroscopic management of lower pole renal calculi. Urology 56(6):935–939PubMed
32.
Auge BK, Dahm P, Wu NZ, Preminger GM (2001) Ureteroscopic management of lower-pole renal calculi: technique of calculus displacement. J Endourol 15(8):835–838PubMed
33.
Schuster TG, Hollenbeck BK, Faerber GJ, Wolf JSJ (2002) Ureteroscopic treatment of lower pole calculi: comparison of lithotripsy in situ and after displacement. J Urol 168(1):43–45PubMed
34.
Pan J, Xue W, Xia L, Zhong H, Zhu Y, Du Z et al (2014) Ureteroscopic lithotripsy in Trendelenburg position for proximal ureteral calculi: a prospective, randomized, comparative study. Int Urol Nephrol 46(10):1895–1901PubMed
35.
Zhou R, Han C, Hao L, Chen B, Zang G, Fan T et al (2018) Ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the Trendelenburg position for extracting obstructive upper ureteral obstruction stones: a prospective, randomized, comparative trial. Scand J Urol 52(4):291–295PubMed
36.
Patel N, Akhavein A, Hinck B, Jain R, Monga M (2017) Tipless nitinol stone baskets: comparison of penetration force, radial dilation force, opening dynamics, and deflection. Urology 103:256–260PubMed
37.
Bach T, Geavlete B, Herrmann TRW, Gross AJ (2008) Working tools in flexible ureterorenoscopy—influence on flow and deflection: what does matter? J Endourol 22(8):1639–1643PubMed
38.
Cloutier J, Cordeiro ER, Kamphuis GM, Villa L, Letendre J, de la Rosette JJ et al (2014) The glue-clot technique: a new technique description for small calyceal stone fragments removal. Urolithiasis 42(5):441–444PubMed
39.
Lechevallier E, Luciani M, Nahon O, Lay F, Coulange C (2003) Transurethral ureterorenolithotripsy using new automated irrigation/suction system controlling pressure and flow compared with standard irrigation: a randomized pilot study. J Endourol 17(2):97–101PubMed
40.
Ghani KR, Wolf JSJ (2015) What is the stone-free rate following flexible ureteroscopy for kidney stones? Nat Rev Urol 12(5):281–288PubMed
41.
Ahn JS, Holt SK, May PC, Harper JD (2018) National imaging trends after ureteroscopic or shock wave lithotripsy for nephrolithiasis. J Urol 199(2):500–507PubMed
42.
Chew BH, Brotherhood HL, Sur RL, Wang AQ, Knudsen BE, Yong C et al (2016) Natural history, complications and re-intervention rates of asymptomatic residual stone fragments after ureteroscopy: a report from the EDGE research consortium. J Urol 195(4 Pt 1):982–986PubMed
43.
Portis AJ, Laliberte MA, Heinisch A (2015) Repeat surgery after ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy with attempted complete extraction of fragments: long-term follow-up. Urology 85(6):1272–1278PubMed
44.
Bhojani N, Paonessa JE, El Tayeb MM, Williams JCJ, Hameed TA, Lingeman JE (2018) Sensitivity of noncontrast computed tomography for small renal calculi with endoscopy as the gold standard. Urology 117:36–40PubMed
45.
Fayad AS, Elsheikh MG, Ghoneima W (2017) Tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for lower calyceal stones of 2 cm: a prospective randomised controlled study. Arab J Urol 15(1):36–41PubMed
46.
Lee YJ, Bak DJ, Chung J-W, Lee JN, Kim HT, Yoo ES et al (2016) Is it necessary to actively remove stone fragments during retrograde intrarenal surgery? Investig Clin Urol 57(4):274–279PubMedPubMedCentral
47.
El-Nahas AR, Almousawi S, Alqattan Y, Alqadri IM, Al-Shaiji TF, Al-Terki A (2019) Dusting versus fragmentation for renal stones during flexible ureteroscopy. Arab J Urol 17(2):138–142PubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Ibrahim A, Elhilali MM, Fahmy N, Carrier S, Andonian S (2020) Double-blinded prospective randomized clinical trial comparing regular and moses modes of holmium laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 34(5):624–628PubMedPubMedCentral
49.
Villa L, Ventimiglia E, Proietti S, Giusti G, Briganti A, Salonia A et al (2020) Does working channel position influence the effectiveness of flexible ureteroscopy? Results from an in vitro study. BJU Int 125(3):449–456PubMed
50.
Dragos LB, Somani BK, Keller EX, de Coninck VMJ, Herrero MR-M, Kamphuis GM et al (2019) Characteristics of current digital single-use flexible ureteroscopes versus their reusable counterparts: an in-vitro comparative analysis. Transl Androl Urol 8(Suppl 4):S359–S370PubMedPubMedCentral
51.
Talso M, Emiliani E, Haddad M, Berthe L, Baghdadi M, Montanari E et al (2016) Laser fiber and flexible ureterorenoscopy: the safety distance concept. J Endourol 30(12):1269–1274PubMed
52.
De Cruz JE, Morcillo E, Folkersma LR, Alvarez S, Margallo FMS, Soria F (2017) Complications of endourologic procedures: a review on iatrogenic ureteral perforation. ARC J Urol 2(2):17–24
53.
Cornu JN, Herrmann T, Traxer O, Matlaga B (2016) Prevention and management following complications from endourology procedures. Eur Urol Focus 2(1):49–59PubMed
54.
Paiva MM, da Silva RD, Jaworski P, Kim FJ, Molina WR (2016) Subcapsular hematoma after ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy. Can J Urol 23(4):8385–8387PubMed
55.
Srougi V, Padovani GP, Marchini GS, Vicentini FC, Mazzucchi E, Srougi M (2015) Outcomes of surgical treatment of ureteral strictures after laser ureterolithotripsy for impacted stones. Can J Urol 22(6):8079–8084PubMed
56.
Schoenthaler M, Buchholz N, Farin E, Ather H, Bach C, Bach T et al (2014) The Post-Ureteroscopic Lesion Scale (PULS): a multicenter video-based evaluation of inter-rater reliability. World J Urol 32(4):1033–1040PubMed
57.
58.
Wilson W, Preminger G (1990) Intrarenal pressures generated during flexible deflectable ureterorenoscopy. J Endourol 4(2):135–141
59.
Guo H-Q, Shi H-L, Li X-G, Gan W-D, Zeng L-Q, Liu G-X et al (2008) Relationship between the intrapelvic perfusion pressure in minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy and postoperative recovery. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 46(1):52–54PubMed
60.
Alsyouf M, Abourbih S, West B, Hodgson H, Baldwin DD (2018) Elevated renal pelvic pressures during percutaneous nephrolithotomy risk higher postoperative pain and longer hospital stay. J Urol 199(1):193–199PubMed
61.
Whitehurst LA, Somani BK (2017) Perirenal hematoma after ureteroscopy: a systematic review. J Endourol 31(5):438–445PubMed
62.
Uchida Y, Takazawa R, Kitayama S, Tsujii T (2018) Predictive risk factors for systemic inflammatory response syndrome following ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy. Urolithiasis 46(4):375–381PubMed
63.
Fan S, Gong B, Hao Z, Zhang L, Zhou J, Zhang Y et al (2015) Risk factors of infectious complications following flexible ureteroscope with a holmium laser: a retrospective study. Int J Clin Exp Med 8(7):11252–11259PubMedPubMedCentral
64.
Ng YH, Somani BK, Dennison A, Kata SG, Nabi G, Brown S (2010) Irrigant flow and intrarenal pressure during flexible ureteroscopy: the effect of different access sheaths, working channel instruments, and hydrostatic pressure. J Endourol 24(12):1915–1920PubMed
65.
Osther PJS (2018) Risks of flexible ureterorenoscopy: pathophysiology and prevention. Urolithiasis 46(1):59–67PubMed
66.
Al-Qahtani SM, Letendre J, Thomas A, Natalin R, Saussez T, Traxer O (2014) Which ureteral access sheath is compatible with your flexible ureteroscope? J Endourol 28(3):286–290PubMed
67.
Hein S, Petzold R, Suarez-Ibarrola R, Müller P-F, Schoenthaler M, Miernik A (2020) Thermal effects of Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy during retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in an ex vivo porcine kidney model. World J Urol 38(3):753–760PubMed
68.
Brehmer M, Svensson I (2000) Heat-induced apoptosis in human prostatic stromal cells. BJU Int 85(4):535–541PubMed
69.
Wollin DA, Carlos EC, Tom WR, Simmons WN, Preminger GM, Lipkin ME (2018) Effect of laser settings and irrigation rates on ureteral temperature during holmium laser lithotripsy, an in vitro model. J Endourol 32(1):59–63PubMed
70.
Aldoukhi AH, Ghani KR, Hall TL, Roberts WW (2017) Thermal response to high-power holmium laser lithotripsy. J Endourol 31(12):1308–1312PubMed
71.
Sapareto SA, Dewey WC (1984) Thermal dose determination in cancer therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 10(6):787–800PubMed
72.
Aldoukhi AH, Hall TL, Ghani KR, Maxwell AD, MacConaghy B, Roberts WW (2018) Caliceal fluid temperature during high-power holmium laser lithotripsy in an in vivo porcine model. J Endourol 32(8):724–729PubMedPubMedCentral
73.
Tracey J, Gagin G, Morhardt D, Hollingsworth J, Ghani KR (2018) Ureteroscopic high-frequency dusting utilizing a 120-W holmium laser. J Endourol 32(4):290–295PubMed
74.
Blackmon RL, Irby PB, Fried NM (2010) Thulium fiber laser lithotripsy using tapered fibers. Lasers Surg Med 42(1):45–50PubMed
75.
Blackmon RL, Irby PB, Fried NM (2011) Comparison of holmium:YAG and thulium fiber laser lithotripsy: ablation thresholds, ablation rates, and retropulsion effects. J Biomed Opt 16(7):071403PubMed
76.
Hardy LA, Gonzalez DA, Irby PB, Fried NM (2018) Fragmentation and dusting of large kidney stones using compact, air-cooled, high peak power, 1940-nm, thulium fiber laser. In: Kang HW, Chan KF (eds) Therapeutics and diagnostics in urology 2018. SPIE; 2018, pp 57–61
77.
78.
Andreeva V, Vinarov A, Yaroslavsky I, Kovalenko A, Vybornov A, Rapoport L et al (2020) Preclinical comparison of superpulse thulium fiber laser and a holmium:YAG laser for lithotripsy. World J Urol 38(2):497–503PubMed
79.
White MD, Moran ME, Calvano CJ, Borhan-Manesh A, Mehlhaff BA (1998) Evaluation of retropulsion caused by holmium:YAG laser with various power settings and fibers. J Endourol 12(2):183–186PubMed
80.
81.
82.
Ergakov D, Martov AG, Guseynov M (2018) The comparative clinical study of Ho: YAG and SuperPulse Tm fiber laser lithotripters. Eur Urol Suppl 17(2):e1391
83.
Yaroslavsky I, Vinnichenko V, McNeill T, Novoseltseva A, Perchuk I, Vybornov A et al (2018) Optimization of a novel Tm fiber laser lithotripter in terms of stone ablation efficiency and retropulsion reduction. In: procspie. 2018, p 104680H (Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Conference Series; vol. 10468)
84.
Fried NM, Irby PB (2018) Advances in laser technology and fibre-optic delivery systems in lithotripsy. Nat Rev Urol 15(9):563–573PubMed
85.
Traxer O, Rapoport L, Tsarichenko D, Dymov A, Enikeev D, Sorokin N et al (2018) V03-02 first clinical study on superpulse thulium fiber laser for lithotripsy. J Urol 199(4S):e321–e322
86.
De Coninck VMJ, Keller EX, Kovalenko A, Vinnichenko V, Traxer O (2019) Dusting efficiency comparison between Moses technology of Ho:YAG laser and superpulse thulium fiber laser. Eur Urol Suppl 18(1):e1757–e1758
87.
Metadata
Title
Consultation on kidney stones, Copenhagen 2019: aspects of intracorporeal lithotripsy in flexible ureterorenoscopy
Authors
Søren Kissow Lildal
Kim Hovgaard Andreassen
Joyce Baard
Marianne Brehmer
Matthew Bultitude
Ylva Eriksson
Khurshid R. Ghani
Helene Jung
Guido Kamphuis
Peter Kronenberg
Ben Turney
Olivier Traxer
Øyvind Ulvik
Palle Jörn Sloth Osther
Publication date
01-06-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
World Journal of Urology / Issue 6/2021
Print ISSN: 0724-4983
Electronic ISSN: 1433-8726
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03481-9

Other articles of this Issue 6/2021

World Journal of Urology 6/2021 Go to the issue

Original Article

Bladder cancer in patients younger than 40 years: outcomes from the National Cancer Database

Original Article

Real-world comparative effectiveness of shockwave lithotripsy versus ureterorenoscopy for the treatment of urinary stones

Original Article

Predictors of adverse pathology on radical prostatectomy specimen in men initially enrolled in active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer

Original Article

Urinary and sexual function after treatment with temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) in men with LUTS: 6-month interim results of the MT-06-study

Original Article

Added value of systematic biopsy in men with a clinical suspicion of prostate cancer undergoing biparametric MRI-targeted biopsy: multi-institutional external validation study

Original Article

Preliminary assessment of patient and physician satisfaction with the use of teleconsultation in urology during the COVID-19 pandemic