PD42-05 LONG-PULSE VERSUS SHORT-PULSE LASER LITHOTRIPSY PERFORMANCE

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyStone Disease: New Technology1 Apr 2015PD42-05 LONG-PULSE VERSUS SHORT-PULSE LASER LITHOTRIPSY PERFORMANCE Peter Kronenberg and Olivier Traxer Peter KronenbergPeter Kronenberg More articles by this author and Olivier TraxerOlivier Traxer More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.2590AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Long-pulse lithotripsy has recently become available and its efficiency is still unclear. The authors decided to evaluate long-pulse lithotripsy performance in comparison to traditional short-pulse lithotripsy. METHODS An automated laser fragmentation testing system was used to perform laser-lithotripsy experiments creating ablation fissures on artificial stones made from soft and hard stone material (plaster of Paris and BegoStone). 272-μm core laser fibers (stripped and cleaved according to manufacturer recommendations), as well as high-frequency low-pulse energy (HiFr-LoPE; 20Hz x 0.5J) and low-frequency high-pulse energy (LoFr-HiPE; 5Hz x 2.0J) lithotripter settings were employed to cover most typical lithotripsy conditions. All combinations were tested using both the traditional short-pulse and the novel long-pulse mode, in multiple 30-second-long lithotripsy experiments. Ablation volumes were measured and compared. Laser-fiber tips were photographed before and after lithotripsy to complement the results. RESULTS Short-pulse mode is always more ablative than long-pulse mode (p<0.00001), regardless of stone material or lithotripter settings, with an average 17.4% higher ablation volume, 25.0% at LoFr-HiPE and 9.9% at HiFr-LoPE. Short-pulse mode makes 25.2% wider fissures, and although less ablative, long-pulse mode creates on average 13.0% deeper fissures. Ablation volume increased with softer stone material or with LoFr-HiPE settings, regardless of pulse type. More fiber tip degradation with harder stone material or with LoFr-HiPE settings is observed in both pulse modes, however, these damages are considerably less evident in long-pulse lithotripsy. CONCLUSIONS Traditional short-pulse lithotripter settings are more ablative than novel long-pulse settings. Long-pulse lithotripsy shows less fiber tip degradation. © 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 193Issue 4SApril 2015Page: e887-e888 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2015 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Peter Kronenberg More articles by this author Olivier Traxer More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...