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

dc.contributor.coauthorErol, Eren
dc.contributor.coauthorEcer, Gokhan
dc.contributor.coauthorGokce, Mehmet Ilker
dc.contributor.coauthorBalasar, Mehmet
dc.contributor.coauthorBabayigit, Muammer
dc.contributor.coauthorAksoy, Elif Ipek
dc.contributor.coauthorSarica, Kemal
dc.contributor.coauthorAhmed, Kamran
dc.contributor.coauthorGuven, Selcuk
dc.contributor.departmentN/A
dc.contributor.kuauthorKiremit, Murat Can
dc.contributor.kuauthorSarıkaya, Ahmet Furkan
dc.contributor.kuauthorKaraarslan, Umut Can
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSchool of Medicine
dc.date.accessioned2024-12-29T09:40:09Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.description.abstractIn 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.
dc.description.indexedbyWoS
dc.description.indexedbyScopus
dc.description.indexedbyPubMed
dc.description.issue1
dc.description.openaccessGreen Published, hybrid
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.sponsorsNo Statement Available
dc.description.volume52
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00240-024-01535-w
dc.identifier.eissn2194-7236
dc.identifier.issn2194-7228
dc.identifier.quartileQ2
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85184792469
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-024-01535-w
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/23224
dc.identifier.wos1160771700003
dc.keywordsFlexible ureterorenoscopy
dc.keywordsKidney stone
dc.keywordsRetrograde intrarenal surgery
dc.keywordsHigh-power laser
dc.keywordsLow-power laser
dc.languageen
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relation.grantnoNecmettin Erbakan University
dc.sourceUrolithiasis
dc.subjectUrology and nephrology
dc.titleMulticentric evaluation of high and low power lasers on RIRS success using propensity score analysis
dc.typeJournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.contributor.kuauthorKiremit, Murat Can
local.contributor.kuauthorSarıkaya, Ahmet Furkan
local.contributor.kuauthorKaraarslan, Umut Can

Files