| Literature DB >> 36193637 |
Gyoohwan Jung1, Seung Min Lee2, Sang Won So2, Sehwan Kim2, Seong Chan Kim3, Ohbin Kwon3, Hyunjae Song4, Min Joo Choi3,5, Sung Yong Cho2,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is essential to understand the mechanism of the various causes of laser fiber damage and an ideal method of reducing endoscope damage induced by laser emission in multiple sites. This study classified the different patterns of laser fiber degradation according to laser settings and analyzed the role of cavitation bubbles to find a desirable way of minimizing endoscope damage.Entities:
Keywords: Lasers; Pattern of Degradation; Ureteroscopes
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36193637 PMCID: PMC9530307 DOI: 10.3346/jkms.2022.37.e280
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Korean Med Sci ISSN: 1011-8934 Impact factor: 5.354
Fig. 1Patterns of laser fiber degradation. Types of laser fiber damages. (A) Charring, (B) Limited peeled off, (C) Extensive peeled off, (D) Bumpy, (E) Bumpy, (F) Crack, (G) Break off.
Damage pattern distribution according to the time of the laser emission and the laser setting
| Time | Laser setting | Charring | Limited Peeled off | Extensive Peeled off | Bumpy | Whitish plaque | Crack | Break off | Fiber length (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 min | 1 J, 10 Hz (n = 20) | 9 (45%) | 6 (30%) | 19 (95%) | 9 (45%) | 11 (55%) | 2 (10%) | 0 (0%) | 28.82 ± 0.73 |
| 3 min | 1 J, 10 Hz (n = 20) | 15 (75%) | 15 (75%) | 15 (75%) | 7 (35%) | 7 (35%) | 8 (40%) | 1 (5%) | 28.95 ± 0.98 |
| 1 J, 20 Hz (n = 20) | 19 (95%) | 12 (60%) | 14 (70%) | 7 (35%) | 11 (55%) | 10 (50%) | 1 (5%) | 28.58 ± 0.51 | |
| 1 J, 30 Hz (n = 19) | 19 (100%) | 17 (89%) | 14 (74%) | 5 (26%) | 8 (42%) | 9 (47%) | 0 (0%) | 28.83 ± 1.07 | |
| 2 J, 10 Hz (n = 19) | 17 (89%) | 13 (68%) | 16 (84%) | 6 (32%) | 9 (47%) | 7 (37%) | 2 (10%) | 28.22 ± 0.93 | |
| Sum (n = 78) | 70 (90%) | 57 (73%) | 59 (76%) | 25 (32%) | 35 (45%) | 34 (44%) | 4 (5%) | 28.65 ± 0.92 | |
| 5 min | 1 J, 10 Hz (n = 10) | 9 (90%) | 5 (50%) | 10 (100%) | 6 (60%) | 7 (70%) | 4 (40%) | 0 (0%) | 27.75 ± 1.05 |
| 1 J, 20 Hz (n = 5) | 4 (80%) | 3 (60%) | 5 (100%) | 4 (80%) | 4 (80%) | 1 (20%) | 1 (20%) | 24.90 ± 0.50 | |
| 1J, 30Hz (n = 5) | 4 (80%) | 2 (40%) | 5 (100%) | 2 (40%) | 4 (80%) | 1 (100%) | 0 (0%) | 24.04 ± 0.86 | |
| Sum (n = 20) | 17 (85%) | 10 (50%) | 20 (100%) | 12 (60%) | 15 (75%) | 6 (30%) | 1 (5%) | 26.11 ± 1.91 |
Damage pattern distribution according to the caliber
| Diameters of laser fibers | Charring | Limited Peeled off | Extensive Peeled off | Bumpy | Whitish plaque | Crack | Break off | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 200 um (n = 38) | 34 (89%) | 33 (87%) | 25 (66%) | 16 (42%) | 21 (55%) | 18 (47%) | 3 (8%) | 0.227 |
| 365 um (n = 40) | 36 (90%) | 24 (60%) | 34 (85%) | 9 (23%) | 14 (35%) | 16 (40%) | 1 (3%) |
The occurrence rates of 7 types of fiber degradation
| Laser fiber damage according to the firing time | 1 min | 3 min | 5 min | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All settings | |||||
| Charring | 45.0% | 89.7% | 85.0% | 0.000 | |
| LPO | 30.0% | 73.1% | 50.0% | 0.001 | |
| EPO | 95.0% | 75.6% | 100.0% | 0.010 | |
| Bumpy | 45.0% | 32.1% | 60.0% | 0.061 | |
| Crack | 10.0% | 43.6% | 30.0% | 0.057 | |
| Break off | 0% | 5.1% | 5.0% | 0.587 | |
| Whitish plaque | 55.0% | 44.9% | 75.0% | 0.053 | |
| 10 Hz group | |||||
| Charring | 45.0% | 87.2% | 90.0% | 0.001 | |
| LPO | 25.0% | 82.1% | 50.0% | 0.000 | |
| EPO | 95.0% | 74.4% | 100.0% | 0.040 | |
| Bumpy | 45.0% | 30.8% | 60.0% | 0.196 | |
| Crack | 10.0% | 43.6% | 40.0% | 0.031 | |
| Break off | 0% | 2.6% | 0% | 0.677 | |
| Whitish plaque | 55.0% | 38.5% | 70.0% | 0.153 | |
LPO = limited peeled off, EPO = extended peeled off.
Fig. 2Cavitation around the tip of the laser fiber. Single shot of laser emission with the energy of 1 J, 40,000 frames per second, and 1 microsec minimum exposure time.
Fig. 3Size differences of cavitation bubbles according to the laser power (J). Migration of the bubbles at the distance of 1 mm.
Fig. 4Laser tip during flexible ureteroscopic surgery. The laser fiber cannot be advanced > 3 mm from the tip of the flexible ureteroscope to reach the stone when the laser fiber almost escapes from the stones because of the acute deflection angle in a lower pole (A) or in a diverticular space (B). Change in the lengths of the intact part of the laser fibers are shown before and after pop-dusting techniques for 5 minutes. The laser setting of 1 J-20 Hz (C, D) showed longer remnant laser fibers than 1 J-30 Hz (E, F).