Purpose: To examine gas bubbles generated by two laser lithotripsy devices, a pulsed thulium solid-state laser and a holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) device, and their possible effects in lithotripsy. Materials and Methods: We investigated two Dornier laser devices, a Medilas H Solvo 35 and a pulsed solid-state thulium laser evaluation model (Dornier MedTech Laser GmbH, Wessling, Germany). Our setup consisted of a water-filled glass tank heated to 37/60/70°C. Different laser power/frequency settings and short/long pulses were examined for both laser devices. We analyzed the impact of degraded, cut, and broken fibers on gas bubble anatomy. Furthermore, high-speed recordings of BegoStone ablation were analyzed. For all recordings, we used a Photron Nova S12 camera. Results: These two devices produced differently shaped gas bubbles under different fiber conditions, temperatures, power settings, and short and long pulse settings, which explain the differing repulsive force and pressure values. Inside the gas bubble, a cone was visible whose angle correlates with the protruding jet. We observed turbulences and swirls moving back and forth the fiber tip. During fragmentation, sparks are generated that demonstrate the photothermal effect, and we recorded stone fragments being pulled toward the fiber. Both devices showed comparable results with differences mainly due to pulse lengths. Conclusion: The shapes of the vapor bubbles formed during laser lithotripsy depend on several factors. Excessive transoperative fiber cleavage seems to be unnecessary. Due to the large gas bubbles observed and because of the amount of potential pressure generated, only low energies should be applied in the ureter.
Purpose: To examine gas bubbles generated by two laser lithotripsy devices, a pulsed thulium solid-state laser and a holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) device, and their possible effects in lithotripsy. Materials and Methods: We investigated two Dornier laser devices, a Medilas H Solvo 35 and a pulsed solid-state thulium laser evaluation model (Dornier MedTech Laser GmbH, Wessling, Germany). Our setup consisted of a water-filled glass tank heated to 37/60/70°C. Different laser power/frequency settings and short/long pulses were examined for both laser devices. We analyzed the impact of degraded, cut, and broken fibers on gas bubble anatomy. Furthermore, high-speed recordings of BegoStone ablation were analyzed. For all recordings, we used a Photron Nova S12 camera. Results: These two devices produced differently shaped gas bubbles under different fiber conditions, temperatures, power settings, and short and long pulse settings, which explain the differing repulsive force and pressure values. Inside the gas bubble, a cone was visible whose angle correlates with the protruding jet. We observed turbulences and swirls moving back and forth the fiber tip. During fragmentation, sparks are generated that demonstrate the photothermal effect, and we recorded stone fragments being pulled toward the fiber. Both devices showed comparable results with differences mainly due to pulse lengths. Conclusion: The shapes of the vapor bubbles formed during laser lithotripsy depend on several factors. Excessive transoperative fiber cleavage seems to be unnecessary. Due to the large gas bubbles observed and because of the amount of potential pressure generated, only low energies should be applied in the ureter.