Purpose: To compare vapor tunnel (VT) and virtual basket (VB) tools to reduce retropulsion in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones. Methods: Patients with a single proximal ureteral stone were randomly assigned to holmium laser lithotripsy with the use of VT (Group A) or VB (Group B) tool. The 150W holmium:YAG cyber Ho generator was used. We compared operative time, dusting time, need for flexible ureteroscopy due to stone push-up and occurrence of ureteral lesions. The stone-free rate (SFR) and the occurrence of postoperative ureteral strictures were assessed. Results: 186 patients were treated, of which 92 with the VT (49.5%, Group A) and 94 with the VB (50.5%, Group B). Mean stone size was 0.92 vs. 0.91 cm in Groups A vs. B (p = 0.32). Mean total operative time and dusting time were comparable between groups. 7 (7.6%) vs. 6 (6.4%) patients in Groups A vs. B required a flexible ureteroscope because of stone push-up (p = 0.12). Ureteral mucosa lesions were observed in 15 (16.3%) vs. 18 (19.1%) cases in the VT vs. VB group (p = 0.09). 1-Month SFR was comparable (97.8% vs. 95.7%, p = 0.41). We observed one case (1.1%) of postoperative ureteral stricture in the VT group vs. two cases (2.1%) in the VB group (p = 0.19). Conclusions: VT and VB are equally safe and effective tools in reducing retropulsion of ureteral stones. Operative time, dusting time and SFR were comparable. They also equally avoided stone push-up and prevented ureteral lesions, which may later occur in ureteral strictures.

A comparison between vapor tunnel and virtual basket for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones using holmium:YAG laser (Cyber Ho). Which is the best tool to reduce retropulsion? / Perri, Davide; Besana, U.; Mazzoleni, F.; Pacchetti, A.; Morini, E.; Verzotti, E.; Maltagliati, M.; Romero-Otero, J.; Pastore, A. L.; Gozen, A. S.; Kallidonis, P.; Pushkar, D.; Govorov, A.; Bozzini, G.. - In: WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY. - ISSN 1433-8726. - 42:1(2024), pp. 244-248. [10.1007/s00345-024-04961-y]

A comparison between vapor tunnel and virtual basket for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones using holmium:YAG laser (Cyber Ho). Which is the best tool to reduce retropulsion?

Pastore, A. L.;
2024

Abstract

Purpose: To compare vapor tunnel (VT) and virtual basket (VB) tools to reduce retropulsion in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones. Methods: Patients with a single proximal ureteral stone were randomly assigned to holmium laser lithotripsy with the use of VT (Group A) or VB (Group B) tool. The 150W holmium:YAG cyber Ho generator was used. We compared operative time, dusting time, need for flexible ureteroscopy due to stone push-up and occurrence of ureteral lesions. The stone-free rate (SFR) and the occurrence of postoperative ureteral strictures were assessed. Results: 186 patients were treated, of which 92 with the VT (49.5%, Group A) and 94 with the VB (50.5%, Group B). Mean stone size was 0.92 vs. 0.91 cm in Groups A vs. B (p = 0.32). Mean total operative time and dusting time were comparable between groups. 7 (7.6%) vs. 6 (6.4%) patients in Groups A vs. B required a flexible ureteroscope because of stone push-up (p = 0.12). Ureteral mucosa lesions were observed in 15 (16.3%) vs. 18 (19.1%) cases in the VT vs. VB group (p = 0.09). 1-Month SFR was comparable (97.8% vs. 95.7%, p = 0.41). We observed one case (1.1%) of postoperative ureteral stricture in the VT group vs. two cases (2.1%) in the VB group (p = 0.19). Conclusions: VT and VB are equally safe and effective tools in reducing retropulsion of ureteral stones. Operative time, dusting time and SFR were comparable. They also equally avoided stone push-up and prevented ureteral lesions, which may later occur in ureteral strictures.
2024
Holmium:YAG laser; retropulsion; ureteral stone; vapor tunnel; virtual basket
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
A comparison between vapor tunnel and virtual basket for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones using holmium:YAG laser (Cyber Ho). Which is the best tool to reduce retropulsion? / Perri, Davide; Besana, U.; Mazzoleni, F.; Pacchetti, A.; Morini, E.; Verzotti, E.; Maltagliati, M.; Romero-Otero, J.; Pastore, A. L.; Gozen, A. S.; Kallidonis, P.; Pushkar, D.; Govorov, A.; Bozzini, G.. - In: WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY. - ISSN 1433-8726. - 42:1(2024), pp. 244-248. [10.1007/s00345-024-04961-y]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Perri_Comparison_2024.pdf

solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 447.96 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
447.96 kB Adobe PDF   Contatta l'autore

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1708919
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact