Literature DB >> 35771241

MOSES™ pulse modulation technology versus conventional pulse delivery technology: the effect on irrigation fluid temperature during flexible ureteroscopy.

Angelis Peteinaris1, Solon Faitatziadis1, Arman Tsaturyan1, Konstantinos Pagonis1, Evangelos Liatsikos1,2,3, Panagiotis Kallidonis4.   

Abstract

To compare the effect of MOSES™ modulation technology to conventional pulse delivery technology on the irrigation fluid temperature (IFT) under different irrigation conditions during flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) in a live-anesthetized porcine model. For this experiment was used one female pig. A percutaneous access was obtained and a 30Fr sheath was placed inside the upper calyceal system. A thermocouple was inserted through the sheath to the upper calyx to record the effect on IFT during FURS. A Lumenis 120H Ho:YAG laser was used and the IFT was recorded during laser activation for 30 s at a laser power of 20 W, 40 W and 60 W under gravity and manual pump irrigation using MOSES™ and conventional pulse delivery technology. In the highest power settings the maximum IFT was achieved in 18 s under gravity irrigation (66.4 °C). It seems that there is no significant difference on IFT between MOSES and conventional mode on the IFT under different irrigation conditions during FURS at 20 W, 40 W and 60 W power settings. Furthermore, our results indicate that under manual pumping even high-power settings (40 W, 60 W) can be performed with safety. In the in vivo model, the MOSES™ pulse delivery technology does not have a significant difference in the maximal IFT in comparison to conventional pulse delivery technology during FURS in the same power settings. Manual pumping should be used to keep the IFT within safe limits.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Irrigation; Laser; Pig; Temperature; Ureteroscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35771241     DOI: 10.1007/s00240-022-01342-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urolithiasis        ISSN: 2194-7228            Impact factor:   2.861


  11 in total

1.  The Rise and Fall of High Temperatures During Ureteroscopic Holmium Laser Lithotripsy.

Authors:  Brenton Winship; Daniel Wollin; Evan Carlos; Chloe Peters; Jingqiu Li; Russell Terry; Kohldon Boydston; Glenn M Preminger; Michael E Lipkin
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 2.942

2.  Thermal effects of Ho:YAG laser lithotripsy during retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in an ex vivo porcine kidney model.

Authors:  Simon Hein; Ralf Petzold; Rodrigo Suarez-Ibarrola; Philippe-Fabian Müller; Martin Schoenthaler; Arkadiusz Miernik
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2019-05-16       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 3.  Ho: YaG laser lithotripsy: recent innovations.

Authors:  Benedikt Becker; Andreas J Gross; Christopher Netsch
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.309

4.  Effects of irrigation parameters and access sheath size on the intra-renal temperature during flexible ureteroscopy with a high-power laser.

Authors:  Yasser A Noureldin; Ergina Farsari; Panteleimon Ntasiotis; Constantinos Adamou; Athanasios Vagionis; Theofanis Vrettos; Evangelos N Liatsikos; Panagiotis Kallidonis
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Thulium Laser in the Upper Urinary Tract: Does the Heat Generation in the Irrigation Fluid Pose a Risk? Evidence from an In Vivo Experimental Study.

Authors:  Panagiotis Kallidonis; Wissam Kamal; Vasileios Panagopoulos; Marinos Vasilas; Lefteris Amanatides; Iason Kyriazis; Theofanis Vrettos; Fotini Fligou; Evangelos Liatsikos
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 2.942

6.  CEM43°C thermal dose thresholds: a potential guide for magnetic resonance radiofrequency exposure levels?

Authors:  Gerard C van Rhoon; Theodoros Samaras; Pavel S Yarmolenko; Mark W Dewhirst; Esra Neufeld; Niels Kuster
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  EAU Guidelines on Interventional Treatment for Urolithiasis.

Authors:  Christian Türk; Aleš Petřík; Kemal Sarica; Christian Seitz; Andreas Skolarikos; Michael Straub; Thomas Knoll
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Use of the Moses Technology to Improve Holmium Laser Lithotripsy Outcomes: A Preclinical Study.

Authors:  Mostafa M Elhilali; Shadie Badaan; Ahmed Ibrahim; Sero Andonian
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 2.942

9.  Comparison of absorbed irrigation fluid volumes during retrograde intrarenal surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for the treatment of kidney stones larger than 2 cm.

Authors:  Vahit Guzelburc; Mehmet Balasar; Mukaddes Colakogullari; Selcuk Guven; Abdulkadir Kandemir; Ahmet Ozturk; Pelin Karaaslan; Bulent Erkurt; Selami Albayrak
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-10-04

10.  Thermal effect of holmium laser during ureteroscopic lithotripsy.

Authors:  Hui Liang; Lijian Liang; Yin Yu; Bin Huang; Jia'nan Chen; Chaoguo Wang; Zhangguo Zhu; Xiaozhong Liang
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 2.264

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.