Editorial Comment.

Abstract

No AccessJournal of UrologyPediatric Article1 Aug 2022Editorial CommentThis article comments on the following:Comparing Pediatric Ureteroscopy Outcomes with SuperPulsed Thulium Fiber Laser and Low-Power Holmium:YAG Laser Jonathan S. Ellison Jonathan S. EllisonJonathan S. Ellison Department of Urology, Children's Hospital of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002666.01AboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail "Editorial Comment." The Journal of Urology, 208(2), p. 432 Reference 1. : A simulated model for fluid and tissue heating during pediatric laser lithotripsy. J Pediatr Urol 2020; 16: 626.e1. Google Scholar 2. : Thulium fiber laser: the new player for kidney stone treatment? A comparison with holmium:YAG laser. World J Urol 2020; 38: 1883. Google Scholar 3. : Patterns of laser activation during ureteroscopic lithotripsy: effects on caliceal fluid temperature and thermal dose. J Endourol 2021; 35: 1217. Google Scholar © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsRelated articlesJournal of UrologyJun 15, 2022, 12:00:00 AMComparing Pediatric Ureteroscopy Outcomes with SuperPulsed Thulium Fiber Laser and Low-Power Holmium:YAG Laser Volume 208Issue 2August 2022Page: 432-432 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Jonathan S. Ellison Department of Urology, Children's Hospital of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF DownloadLoading ...