Optimal power settings for Holmium:YAG lithotripsy.

PURPOSE We determined the optimal Ho:YAG lithotripsy power settings to achieve maximal fragmentation, minimal fragment size and minimal retropulsion. MATERIALS AND METHODS Stone phantoms were irradiated in water with a Ho:YAG laser using a 365 μm optical fiber. Six distinct power settings were tested, including 0.2 to 2.0 J and 10 to 40 Hz. For all cohorts 500 J total radiant energy were delivered. A seventh cohort (0.2 J 40 Hz) was tested post hoc to a total energy of 1,250 J. Two experimental conditions were tested, including with and without phantom stabilization. Total fragmentation, fragment size and retropulsion were characterized. In mechanism experiments using human calculi we measured crater volume by optical coherence tomography and pressure transients by needle hydrophone across similar power settings. RESULTS Without stabilization increased pulse energy settings produced increased total fragmentation and increased retropulsion (each p <0.0001). Fragment size was smallest for the 0.2 J cohorts (p <0.02). With stabilization increased pulse energy settings produced increased total fragmentation and increased retropulsion but also increased fragment size (each p <0.0001). Craters remained symmetrical and volume increased as pulse energy increased. Pressure transients remained modest at less than 30 bars even at 2.0 J pulse energy. CONCLUSIONS Holmium:YAG lithotripsy varies as pulse energy settings vary. At low pulse energy (0.2 J) less fragmentation and retropulsion occur and small fragments are produced. At high pulse energy (2.0 J) more fragmentation and retropulsion occur with larger fragments. Anti-retropulsion devices produce more efficient lithotripsy, particularly at high pulse energy. Optimal lithotripsy laser dosimetry depends on the desired outcome.

[1]  A J Welch,et al.  Free electron laser lithotripsy: threshold radiant exposures. , 2000, Journal of endourology.

[2]  A J Welch,et al.  Holmium: YAG lithotripsy: photothermal mechanism. , 1999, Journal of endourology.

[3]  Bodo E Knudsen,et al.  Quantification of holmium:yttrium aluminum garnet optical tip degradation. , 2009, Journal of endourology.

[4]  Bernard Choi,et al.  Stone retropulsion during holmium:YAG lithotripsy. , 2003, The Journal of urology.

[5]  Thorsten Bach,et al.  Effect of pulse energy, frequency and length on holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser fragmentation efficiency in non-floating artificial urinary calculi. , 2010, Journal of endourology.

[6]  J. Teichman,et al.  Holmium:YAG lithotripsy efficiency varies with energy density. , 1998, The Journal of urology.

[7]  A J Welch,et al.  Temperature dependence of the absorption coefficient of water for midinfrared laser radiation , 1994, Lasers in surgery and medicine.

[8]  Ralph V Clayman,et al.  Effect of holmium:YAG laser pulse width on lithotripsy retropulsion in vitro. , 2005, Journal of endourology.

[9]  J. Teichman,et al.  Holmium: YAG lithotripsy: optimal power settings. , 1999, Journal of endourology.

[10]  Hyun Wook Kang,et al.  Dependence of calculus retropulsion on pulse duration during HO: YAG laser lithotripsy , 2006, Lasers in surgery and medicine.

[11]  A J Welch,et al.  Effect of pulse duration on bubble formation and laser‐induced pressure waves during holmium laser ablation , 1996, Lasers in surgery and medicine.

[12]  M. Pearle,et al.  Laser lithotripsy and cyanide. , 2000, Journal of endourology.

[13]  J. Teichman,et al.  Holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet lithotripsy efficiency varies with stone composition. , 1998, Urology.

[14]  W. Durfee,et al.  Systematic evaluation of ureteral occlusion devices: insertion, deployment, stone migration, and extraction. , 2009, Urology.

[15]  Michael R. Bailey,et al.  Ultracal-30 gypsum artificial stones for research on the mechanisms of stone breakage in shock wave lithotripsy , 2005, Urological Research.

[16]  J T Bishoff,et al.  Holmium:YAG lithotripsy yields smaller fragments than lithoclast, pulsed dye laser or electrohydraulic lithotripsy. , 1998, The Journal of urology.

[17]  Hassan Razvi,et al.  Holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for upper urinary tract calculi in 598 patients. , 2002, The Journal of urology.

[18]  A J Welch,et al.  Effect of lithotripsy on holmium:YAG optical beam profile. , 2003, Journal of endourology.

[19]  A J Welch,et al.  A perspective on laser lithotripsy: the fragmentation processes. , 2001, Journal of endourology.

[20]  Pei Zhong,et al.  In vitro comparison of stone retropulsion and fragmentation of the frequency doubled, double pulse nd:yag laser and the holmium:yag laser. , 2005, The Journal of urology.

[21]  M. Elhilali,et al.  The use of a novel reverse thermosensitive polymer to prevent ureteral stone retropulsion during intracorporeal lithotripsy: a randomized, controlled trial. , 2010, Journal of Urology.

[22]  K Rink,et al.  Fragmentation process of current laser lithotriptors , 1995, Lasers in surgery and medicine.

[23]  A J Welch,et al.  Erbium: YAG versus holmium:YAG lithotripsy. , 2001, The Journal of urology.