Purpose: Holmium YAG laser lithotripsy (LL) and pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) are the most commonly used procedures in the treatment of ureteral calculi. In a previous meta-analysis examining the treatment effect of the 2 modalities, the authors highlighted the need for large sample size and high quality trials to provide more uncovered outcome. Recently, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the same issue with larger patient number and more complicated data have been published. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to update and synthesize evidence on the efficacy and safety of the 2 procedures in the treatment of ureteral calculi. Methods: The relevant studies were identified by searching Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library Database from January 1990 to November 2015. RCTs assessing the efficacy and safety of Holmium YAG laser and PL for ureteral stones were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. Results: A total of 8 studies were identified including 1,555 patients. Compared with PL, Holmium YAG LL significantly reduced the mean operative time (weighted mean difference = -11.52, 95% CI -17.06 to -5.99, p < 0.0001) and increased the early stone-free rate (OR 2.69, 95% CI 1.91-3.78, p < 0.00001) and the delayed stone-free rate (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.40-3.21, p = 0.0004). However, a higher postoperative ureteral stricture rate (OR 3.38, 95% CI 1.56-7.31, p = 0.002) was observed in LL group over PL group. There was no statistical significance in the ureteral perforation rate (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.65-2.16, p = 0.58), the stone migration rate (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41-1.00, p = 0.05), the postoperative gross hematuria rate (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.40-1.25, p = 0.23) and the postoperative fever rate (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.09, p = 0.12). Conclusions: Our data reconfirmed that Holmium LL for ureteral stones can achieve shorter mean operative time, better early and delayed stone-free rate with larger sample size and more high quality studies. And further trials are unlikely to considerably alter this conclusion. In terms of higher risk of postoperative ureteral stricture in LL group over PL group observed in our review, more high quality, multicenter RCTs with long-term follow-up outcome are warranted to better assess this issue.

Keywords:
Ureteral calculi, Laser lithotripsy, Pneumatic lithotripsy
1.
Khaladkar S, Modi J, Bhansali M, Dobhada S, Patankar S: Which is the best option to treat large (>1.5 cm) midureteric calculi? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2009;19:501-504.
2.
Wright AE, Rukin NJ, Somani BK: Ureteroscopy and stones: current status and future expectations. World J Nephrol 2014;3:243-248.
3.
Razzaghi MR, Razi A, Mazloomfard MM, Golmohammadi Taklimi A, Valipour R, Razzaghi Z: Safety and efficacy of pneumatic lithotripters versus holmium laser in management of ureteral calculi: a randomized clinical trial. Urol J 2013;10:762-766.
4.
Lee J, Gianduzzo TR: Advances in laser technology in urology. Urol Clin North Am 2009;36:189-198.
5.
Akdeniz E, Irkılata L, Demirel HC, Saylık A, Bolat MS, Şahinkaya N, Zengin M, Atilla MK: A comparison of efficacies of holmium YAG laser, and pneumatic lithotripsy in the endoscopic treatment of ureteral stones. Turk J Urol 2014;40:138-143.
6.
Degirmenci T, Gunlusoy B, Kozacioglu Z, Arslan M, Koras O, Arslan B, Minareci S: Comparison of Ho:YAG laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in the treatment of impacted ureteral stones: an analysis of risk factors. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2014;30:153-158.
7.
Manohar T, Ganpule A, Desai M: Comparative evaluation of Swiss LithoClast 2 and holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted upper-ureteral stones. J Endourol 2008;22:443-446.
8.
Yin X, Tang Z, Yu B, Wang Y, Li Y, Yang Q, Tang W: Holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy versus pneumatic lithotripsy for treatment of distal ureteral calculi: a meta-analysis. J Endourol 2013;27:408-414.
9.
Begg CB, Mazumdar M: Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994;50:1088-1101.
10.
Song F, Gilbody S: Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Increase in studies of publication bias coincided with increasing use of meta-analysis. BMJ 1998;316:471.
11.
Li L, Pan Y, Weng Z, Bao W, Yu Z, Wang F: A prospective randomized trial comparing pneumatic lithotripsy and holmium laser for management of middle and distal ureteral calculi. J Endourol 2015;29:883-887.
12.
Cimino S, Favilla V, Russo GI, Saita A, Sortino G, Castelli T, Veroux M, Madonia M, Morgia G: Pneumatic lithotripsy versus holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for the treatment of single ureteral stones: a prospective, single-blinded study. Urol Int 2014;92:468-472.
13.
Kassem A, ElFayoumy H, ElSaied W, ElGammal M, Bedair A: Laser and pneumatic lithotripsy in the endoscopic management of large ureteric stones: a comparative study. Urol Int 2012;88:311-315.
14.
Binbay M, Tepeler A, Singh A, Akman T, Tekinaslan E, Sarilar O, Baykal M, Muslumanoglu AY: Evaluation of pneumatic versus holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy for impacted ureteral stones. Int Urol Nephrol 2011;43:989-995.
15.
Garg S, Mandal AK, Singh SK, Naveen A, Ravimohan M, Aggarwal M, Mete UK, Santosh K: Ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy versus ballistic lithotripsy for treatment of ureteric stones: a prospective comparative study. Urol Int 2009;82:341-345.
16.
Maghsoudi R, Amjadi M, Norizadeh D, Hassanzadeh H: Treatment of ureteral stones: a prospective randomized controlled trial on comparison of Ho:YAG laser and pneumatic lithotripsy. Indian J Urol 2008;24:352-354.
17.
Türk C, Petřík A, Sarica K, Seitz C, Skolarikos A, Straub M, Knoll T: EAU guidelines on diagnosis and conservative management of urolithiasis. Eur Urol 2015;69:468-474.
18.
Kronenberg P, Traxer O: In vitro fragmentation efficiency of holmium: yttrium-aluminum-garnet (YAG) laser lithotripsy - a comprehensive study encompassing different frequencies, pulse energies, total power levels and laser fibre diameters. BJU Int 2014;114:261-267.
19.
Wezel F, Häcker A, Gross AJ, Michel MS, Bach T: Effect of pulse energy, frequency and length on holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser fragmentation efficiency in non-floating artificial urinary calculi. J Endourol 2010;24:1135-1140.
20.
van Driel ML, De Sutter A, De Maeseneer J, Christiaens T: Searching for unpublished trials in Cochrane reviews may not be worth the effort. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:838-844.e3.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
2016
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.