Publication:
Multicentric evaluation of high and low power lasers on RIRS success using propensity score analysis

Thumbnail Image

Departments

Organizational Unit

School / College / Institute

Organizational Unit
SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Upper Org Unit

Program

KU Authors

Co-Authors

Erol, Eren
Ecer, Gokhan
Gokce, Mehmet Ilker
Balasar, Mehmet
Babayigit, Muammer
Aksoy, Elif Ipek
Sarica, Kemal
Ahmed, Kamran
Guven, Selcuk

Publication Date

Language

Embargo Status

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Alternative Title

Abstract

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of HPL on different parameters by different centers and urologists. While doing this, we evaluated different parameters by comparing HPL(High Power laser) and LPL(Low-power laser). This is an observational, retrospective, comparative, multicentric study of prospectively organised database. A total of 217 patients who underwent RIRS for kidney stones smaller than 2 cm in three different centers were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups; LPL used (Group1, n:121 patients) and HPL used (Group2, n:96). Propensity score matching was done in the data analysis part. After matching, a total of 192 patients, 96 patients in both groups, were evaluated. There was no difference between the groups regarding age, gender, stone side, and stone location. The stone-free rate on the first day was 80.3% in Group 1, it was 78.1% in Group 2 (p = 0.9). In the third month, it was 90.7% in Group 1 and 87.5% in Group 2 (p:0.7).Hospitalization duration was significantly higher in Group 1. (2.35 +/- 2.27 days vs. 1.42 +/- 1.10 days; p < 0.001).The operation duration was 88.70 +/- 29.72 min in Group1 and 66.17 +/- 41.02 min in Group2 (p < 0.001). The fluoroscopy time (FT) was 90.73 +/- 4.79 s in Group 1 and 50.78 +/- 5.64 s in Group 2 (p < 0.001). Complications according to Clavien Classification, were similar between the groups(p > 0.05). According to our study similar SFR and complication rates were found with HPL and LPL. In addition, patients who used HPL had lower operation time, hospital stay, and fluoroscopy time than the LPL group. Although high-power lasers are expensive in terms of cost, they affect many parameters and strengthen the hand of urologists thanks to the wide energy and frequency range they offer.

Source

Publisher

Springer

Subject

Urology and nephrology

Citation

Has Part

Source

Urolithiasis

Book Series Title

Edition

DOI

10.1007/s00240-024-01535-w

item.page.datauri

Link

Rights

Copyrights Note

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

3

Views

6

Downloads

View PlumX Details