Skip to main content

Ex vivo study of Ho:YAG and thulium fiber lasers for soft tissue surgery: which laser for which case?

Abstract

The goal of this study was to assess the ablation, coagulation, and carbonization characteristics of the holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) laser and thulium fiber lasers (TFL). The Ho:YAG laser (100 W av.power), the quasi-continuous (QCW) TFL (120 W av.power), and the SuperPulsed (SP) TFL (50 W av.power) were compared on a non-frozen porcine kidney. To control the cutting speed (2 or 5 mm/s), an XY translation stage was used. The Ho:YAG was tested using E = 1.5 J and Pav = 40 W or Pav = 70 W settings. The TFL was tested using E = 1.5 J and Pav = 30 W or Pav = 60 W settings. After ex vivo incision, histological analysis was performed in order to estimate thermal damage. At 40 W, the Ho:YAG displayed a shallower cutting at 2 and 5 mm/s (1.1 ± 0.2 mm and 0.5 ± 0.2 mm, respectively) with virtually zero coagulation. While at 70 W, the minimal coagulation depth measured 0.1 ± 0.1 mm. The incisions demonstrated zero carbonization. Both the QCW and SP TFL did show effective cutting at all speeds (2.1 ± 0.2 mm and 1.3 ± 0.2 mm, respectively, at 30 W) with prominent coagulation (0.6 ± 0.1 mm and 0.4 ± 0.1 mm, respectively, at 70 W) and carbonization. Our study introduced the TFL as a novel efficient alternative for soft tissue surgery to the Ho:YAG laser. The SP TFL offers a Ho:YAG-like incision, while QCW TFL allows for fast, deep, and precise cutting with increased carbonization.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Data availability

On demand.

References

  1. 1.

    Parsons RL, Campbell JL, Thomley MW (1968) Carcinoma of the penis treated by the ruby laser. J Urol 100(1):38–39

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Bruskewitz RC (2003) Quality of life and sexual function in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Rev Urol 5(2):72–80

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Rieken M, Bachmann A (2014) Laser treatment of benign prostate enlargement--which laser for which prostate? Nat Rev Urol 11(3):142–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Kyriazis I, Swiniarski PP, Jutzi S, Wolters M, Netsch C, Burchardt M et al (2015) Transurethral anatomical enucleation of the prostate with Tm:YAG support (ThuLEP): review of the literature on a novel surgical approach in the management of benign prostatic enlargement. World J Urol 33(4):525–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Li K, Xu Y, Tan M, Xia S, Xu Z, Xu D (2019) A retrospective comparison of thulium laser en bloc resection of bladder tumor and plasmakinetic transurethral resection of bladder tumor in primary non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Lasers Med Sci 34(1):85–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Fried NM, Murray KE (2005) High-power thulium fiber laser ablation of urinary tissues at 1.94 microm. J Endourol 19(1):25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Enikeev D, Glybochko P, Rapoport L, Gahan J, Gazimiev M, Spivak L et al (2018) A randomized trial comparing the learning curve of three endoscopic enucleation techniques (HoLEP, ThuFLEP and MEP) for BPH using mentoring approach - initial results. Urology 121:51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Bach T, Huck N, Wezel F, Hacker A, Gross AJ, Michel MS (2010) 70 vs 120 W thulium:yttrium-aluminium-garnet 2 microm continuous-wave laser for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic ex-vivo evaluation. BJU Int 106(3):368–372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09059.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Enikeev D, Glybochko P, Okhunov Z, Alyaev Y, Rapoport L, Tsarichenko D et al (2018) Retrospective analysis of short-term outcomes after monopolar versus laser endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: a single center experience. J Endourol 32(5):417–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Cooper TE, Trezek GJ (1972) A probe technique for determining the thermal conductivity of tissue. J Heat Transf 94:133–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Patch SK, Rao N, Kelly H, Jacobsohn K, See WA (2011) Specific heat capacity of freshly excised prostate specimens. Physiol Meas 32(11):N55–N64

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Giering K, Lamprecht I, Minet O (1995) Determination of the specific heat capacity of healthy and tumorous human tissue. Thermochim Acta 251:199–205

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Fischer AH, Jacobson KA, Rose J, Zeller R. Hematoxylin and eosin staining of tissue and cell sections. CSH protocols. 2008;2008:pdb prot4986

  14. 14.

    Peavy GM (2002) Lasers and laser-tissue interaction. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 32(3):517–534 v-vi

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Fried NM (2006) Therapeutic applications of lasers in urology: an update. Exp Rev Med Dev 3(1):81–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Shah HN, Mahajan AP, Sodha HS, Hegde S, Mohile PD, Bansal MB (2007) Prospective evaluation of the learning curve for holmium laser enucleation of the prostate. J Urol 177(4):1468–1474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Netsch C, Bach T, Herrmann TR, Neubauer O, Gross AJ (2013) Evaluation of the learning curve for thulium vapoenucleation of the prostate (ThuVEP) using a mentor-based approach. World J Urol 31(5):1231–1238

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Kuntz RM (2006) Current role of lasers in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Eur Urol 49(6):961–969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Jung GI, Kim JS, Lee TH, Choi JH, Oh HB, Kim AH et al (2015) Photomechanical effect on type I collagen using pulsed diode laser. Technol Health Care 23(Suppl 2):S535–S541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Andreeva V, Vinarov A, Yaroslavsky I, Kovalenko A, Vybornov A, Rapoport L et al (2019) Preclinical comparison of superpulse thulium fiber laser and a holmium:YAG laser for lithotripsy. World J Urol 38:497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Kuntz RM (2007) Laser treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. World J Urol 25(3):241–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Teichmann HO, Herrmann TR, Bach T (2007) Technical aspects of lasers in urology. World J Urol 25(3):221–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Enikeev D, Glybochko P, Rapoport L, Gahan J, Gazimiev M, Spivak L et al (2018) A randomized trial comparing the learning curve of 3 endoscopic enucleation techniques (HoLEP, ThuFLEP, and MEP) for BPH using mentoring approach-initial results. Urology. 121:51–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Enikeev D, Taratkin M, Klimov R, et al. Superpulsed thulium fiber laser for stone dusting: in search of a perfect ablation regimen-a prospective single-center study. J Endourol. 2020;https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2020.0519. [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jul 15]

  25. 25.

    Enikeev D, Taratkin M, Klimov R, et al. Thulium-fiber laser for lithotripsy: first clinical experience in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. World J Urol. 2020;https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-020-03134-x. [published online ahead of print, 2020 Feb 27]

  26. 26.

    Taratkin M, Laukhtina E, Singla N, et al. How lasers ablate stones: in vitro study of laser lithotripsy (Ho:YAG and Tm-fiber lasers) in different environments [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jan 29]. J Endourol. 2020;https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0441. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2019.0441

  27. 27.

    Fried NM (2018) Recent advances in infrared laser lithotripsy [Invited]. Biomed Opt Express 9(9):4552–4568. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.9.004552 Published 2018 Aug 30

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Large T, Nottingham C, Stoughton C, Williams J Jr, Krambeck A (2020) Comparative study of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate with MOSES enabled pulsed laser modulation. Urology. 136:196–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2019.11.029

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Enikeev D, Shariat SF, Taratkin M, Glybochko P (2020) The changing role of lasers in urologic surgery. Curr Opin Urol 30(1):24–29. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOU.0000000000000695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Taratkin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

No ethics approval is necessary for this type of work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(PDF 259 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Taratkin, M., Kovalenko, A., Laukhtina, E. et al. Ex vivo study of Ho:YAG and thulium fiber lasers for soft tissue surgery: which laser for which case?. Lasers Med Sci (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-020-03189-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Ho:YAG laser
  • Thulium fiber laser
  • Laser-tissue interactions
  • Ex vivo