Home
Abstract
My Abstract(s)
Login
ePosters
Back
Final Presentation Format
Podium Abstract
Eposter Presentation
Eposter in PDF Format
Accept format: PDF. The file size should not be more than 5MB
Eposter in Image Format
Accept format: PNG/JPG/WEBP. The file size should not be more than 2MB
Presentation Date / Time
Submission Status
Submitted
Abstract
Abstract Title
Holmium MOSESTM Laser versus Thulium Fiber Laser for Ureteroscopic Management of 1-2cm Kidney Stones: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
Presentation Type
Podium Abstract
Manuscript Type
Clinical Research
Abstract Category *
Endourology: Urolithiasis
Author's Information
Number of Authors (including submitting/presenting author) *
10
No more than 10 authors can be listed (as per the Good Publication Practice (GPP) Guidelines).
Please ensure the authors are listed in the right order.
Country
Canada
Co-author 1
Hazem Elmansy hazem.mansy@rocketmail.com Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada -
Co-author 2
Ahmed Mousa ahmed-kadry@hotmail.co.uk Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada -
Co-author 3
Oksana Blahitko oksana.blahitko@tbh.net Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada -
Co-author 4
Mohamad Baker Berjaoui mohamadbaker.berjaoui@uhn.ca University Of Toronto Toronto Canada -
Co-author 5
Nawsheen Khan nawsheenkhan11@gmail.com Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada -
Co-author 6
Amr Hodhod amrwuk@yahoo.co.uk King Abdulaziz Medical City, National Guard Hospitals Affairs Ryadh Saudi Arabia -
Co-author 7
Husain Alaradi husainisaalaradi@gmail.com Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada *
Co-author 8
Saud Alhelal drsalhelal@gmail.com Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada -
Co-author 9
Khaled Alotaibi dr-kf@windowslive.com Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada -
Co-author 10
Ruba Abdul Hadi ruba.ahadi@gmail.com Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada Thunder Bay Canada -
Co-author 11
Co-author 12
Co-author 13
Co-author 14
Co-author 15
Co-author 16
Co-author 17
Co-author 18
Co-author 19
Co-author 20
Abstract Content
Introduction
We aimed to compare the laser efficiency and clinical outcomes of two widely used systems—the holmium MOSESTM laser and the thulium fiber laser (TFL)—in the ureteroscopic management of 1-2 cm renal calculi.
Materials and Methods
In this ongoing randomized controlled trial (RCT), we included 71 patients who underwent flexible ureteroscopy (f-URS) for a solitary 1-2 cm kidney stone between August 2022 and July 2024 at our institution. Patients were randomized to undergo treatment with either the holmium MOSES™ laser or TFL. All patients had postoperative computed tomography (CT) scans at 1 month and 3 months. Patient demographics and stone parameters were recorded, including stone site, size, volume, and density. Intraoperative data were collected and analyzed, including total operative time, ureteroscopy time, lasing time, total energy delivered, and stone composition. We recorded the presence of residual stones and the percentage of stone volume reduction. Ablation efficiency was calculated by dividing the energy utilized (J) by the stone volume (mm3). The ablation speed was calculated by dividing the stone volume (mm3) by the lasing time (sec). Patients with a stone size of 0 cm were deemed stone-free.
Results
The MOSESTM and TFL groups comprised 35 and 36 patients, respectively, with no significant differences in baseline patient demographics or stone characteristics between the cohorts. The two modalities had comparable total energy, laser time, efficacy, and ablation speeds. Ablation efficiency was 25.7 J/mm³ in the MOSESTM group and 30 J/mm³ in the TFL group (p=0.98). Additionally, ablation speed was 1.1 mm³/sec in the MOSESTM group and 0.89 mm³/sec in the TFL group (p=0.26). No differences were observed in stone-free or retreatment rates.
Conclusions
The MOSESTM and TFL laser systems demonstrate comparable efficacy for lithotripsy of renal calculi during f-URS, with neither technology showing a distinct clinical advantage.
Keywords
Holmium MOSESTM laser, Thulium Fiber Laser, ureteroscopic management, kidney stones, renal calculi, flexible ureteroscopy, f-URS, laser lithotripsy, stone-free rate, ablation efficiency, ablation speed, randomized controlled trial, RCT, stone volume reduction, residual stones, retreatment rate, 1-2 cm stones, CT scan, lithotripsy efficacy, clinical outcomes, energy delivered, lasing time.
Figure 1
https://storage.unitedwebnetwork.com/files/1237/fe0b312be975fd8326a2cdb883e3b3b2.png
Figure 1 Caption
Preoperative, operative, and follow-up data (up to 3 months)
Figure 2
Figure 2 Caption
Figure 3
Figure 3 Caption
Figure 4
Figure 4 Caption
Figure 5
Figure 5 Caption
Character Count
1919
Vimeo Link
Presentation Details
Session
Free Paper Podium(02): Endourology (A)
Date
Aug. 14 (Thu.)
Time
16:18 - 16:24
Presentation Order
9