研究目的
Investigating the mechanisms of stone ablation with long‐pulsed infrared lasers (photothermal and photomechanical) by evaluating the stone mass‐loss after lithotripsy in different media.
研究成果
Both photothermal and thermomechanical ablation mechanisms occur in parallel during laser lithotripsy. Ho:YAG and TFL U2 predominantly involve a thermomechanical stone ablation mechanism (explosive vaporization), while TFL U1 involves a mostly photothermal mechanism. TFL U2 was characterized by the highest stone mass‐loss in all groups except dehydrated stones ablated in the air.
研究不足
1. The study did not use a Ho:YAG laser with Moses effect. 2. Use of artificial stones (BegoStones) may not fully replicate natural stone conditions. 3. Dehydrated phantoms may still have contained some water, potentially affecting results. 4. Absence of a hands‐free fragmentation setup could introduce bias.
1:Experimental Design and Method Selection:
The study compared three lasers (Ho:YAG, TFL U1, TFL U2) with a single set of laser parameters (15 W =
2:5 J × 30 Hz) to evaluate stone ablation mechanisms in different environments. Sample Selection and Data Sources:
Artificial square stones (phantoms) of uniform density, size, and configuration were used.
3:List of Experimental Equipment and Materials:
Ho:YAG laser (100W, Lumenis, USA), Tm‐fiber laser U1 (120W, NTO IRE‐Polus, Russia), Superpulse Tm‐fiber laser U2 (500W, NTO IRE‐Polus, Russia), BegoStones (Bego GmbH, Bremen, Germany), scales DEMCOM DL‐
4:Experimental Procedures and Operational Workflow:
1 Contact lithotripsy was performed in phantoms in four groups with different hydration and media conditions. Laser ablation was performed with total energy of
5:3 kJ. Data Analysis Methods:
Phantom mass‐loss was calculated as the difference between initial and final mass. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 23 software package.
独家科研数据包,助您复现前沿成果,加速创新突破
获取完整内容