Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency and clinical outcomes of Moses contact mode (MCM) and regular dusting mode (RDM) during flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FURL) for treatment of renal calculus. Methods: This retrospective analysis examined 216 patients with renal calculus who underwent FURL with MCM or RDM between March 2015 and January 2020. Stone characteristics, including size, volume, and density, were collected. Laser parameters, including laser type, laser working time, laser pause time, and foot-pedal use, were automatically recorded by the lithotripter work panel. The percentages of laser working time and laser pause time, stone fragmentation efficiency (SFE; volume/laser working time), postoperative complications, including fever and acute renal failure (ARF), stone-free rate (SFR), and the need for auxiliary procedures were determined. Results: There were no significant differences in preoperative demographic and stone characteristics between the MCM group and the RDM group. The MCM group had a shorter laser working time (4.99 ± 1.06 vs. 5.94 ± 0.96 min, p < 0.001) and a greater SFE (137.86 [163.78–114.38] versus 114.94 [132.06–101.34] mm3/min, p < 0.001), which shortened the overall operative time (18.39 ± 5.13 vs. 21.17 ± 6.78 min, p = 0.001). There were no differences in postoperative complications, including fever and ARF, SFR (86.8 vs. 85.3%, p = 0.743), and auxiliary procedures between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Using Moses laser technology with FURL significantly reduced laser working time and increased SFE, which shortened overall operative time. Urologists should consider this new instrument for the clinical management of renal calculus.

1.
Seklehner
S
,
Laudano
MA
,
Del Pizzo
J
,
Chughtai
B
,
Lee
RK
.
Renal calculi: trends in the utilization of shockwave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy
.
Can J Urol
.
2015 Feb
;
22
(
1
):
7627
34
.
2.
Ghani
KR
,
Andonian
S
,
Bultitude
M
,
Desai
M
,
Giusti
G
,
Okhunov
Z
, et al.
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: update, trends, and future directions
.
Eur Urol
.
2016 Aug
;
70
(
2
):
382
96
. .
3.
Ordonez
M
,
Hwang
EC
,
Borofsky
M
,
Bakker
CJ
,
Gandhi
S
,
Dahm
P
.
Ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent for ureteroscopy in the management of renal and ureteral calculi
.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
.
2019 Feb 6
;
2
:
Cd012703
. .
4.
Wendt-Nordahl
G
,
Mut
T
,
Krombach
P
,
Michel
MS
,
Knoll
T
.
Do new generation flexible ureterorenoscopes offer a higher treatment success than their predecessors?
Urol Res
.
2011 Jun
;
39
(
3
):
185
8
. .
5.
Binbay
M
,
Yuruk
E
,
Akman
T
,
Ozgor
F
,
Seyrek
M
,
Ozkuvanci
U
, et al.
Is there a difference in outcomes between digital and fiberoptic flexible ureterorenoscopy procedures?
J Endourol
.
2010 Dec
;
24
(
12
):
1929
34
. .
6.
Mitchell
S
,
Havranek
E
,
Patel
A
.
First digital flexible ureterorenoscope: initial experience
.
J Endourol
.
2008 Jan
;
22
(
1
):
47
50
. .
7.
Ozimek
T
,
Kramer
MW
,
Hupe
MC
,
Laturnus
JM
,
Struck
JP
,
Hennig
MJP
, et al.
The impact of endourological experience on flexible ureteroscopy outcomes and performance at different levels of expertise: retrospective multifactorial analysis
.
Urol Int
.
2020
;
104
(
5–6
):
452
8
. .
8.
Eisel
M
,
Ströbl
S
,
Pongratz
T
,
Strittmatter
F
,
Sroka
R
.
Holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser induced lithotripsy: in-vitro investigations on fragmentation, dusting, propulsion and fluorescence
.
Biomed Opt Express
.
2018 Nov 1
;
9
(
11
):
5115
28
. .
9.
Becker
B
,
Gross
AJ
,
Netsch
C
.
Ho: YaG laser lithotripsy: recent innovations
.
Curr Opin Urol
.
2019 Mar
;
29
(
2
):
103
7
.
10.
Zarrabi
A
,
Gross
AJ
.
The evolution of lasers in urology
.
Ther Adv Urol
.
2011 Apr
;
3
(
2
):
81
9
. .
11.
Ordon
M
,
Andonian
S
,
Blew
B
,
Schuler
T
,
Chew
B
,
Pace
KT
.
CUA guideline: management of ureteral calculi
.
Can Urol Assoc J
.
2015 Nov–Dec
;
9
(
11–12
):
E837
51
. .
12.
Bagley
DH
,
Kuo
RL
,
Zeltser
IS
.
An update on ureteroscopic instrumentation for the treatment of urolithiasis
.
Curr Opin Urol
.
2004 Mar
;
14
(
2
):
99
106
. .
13.
Ventimiglia
E
,
Traxer
O
.
What is moses effect: a historical perspective
.
J Endourol
.
2019 May
;
33
(
5
):
353
7
. .
14.
Elhilali
MM
,
Badaan
S
,
Ibrahim
A
,
Andonian
S
.
Use of the Moses technology to improve holmium laser lithotripsy outcomes: a preclinical study
.
J Endourol
.
2017 Jun
;
31
(
6
):
598
604
. .
15.
Ito
H
,
Kawahara
T
,
Terao
H
,
Ogawa
T
,
Yao
M
,
Kubota
Y
, et al.
Predictive value of attenuation coefficients measured as Hounsfield units on noncontrast computed tomography during flexible ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy: a single-center experience
.
J Endourol
.
2012 Sept
;
26
(
9
):
1125
30
. .
16.
Ito
H
,
Kawahara
T
,
Terao
H
,
Ogawa
T
,
Yao
M
,
Kubota
Y
, et al.
The most reliable preoperative assessment of renal stone burden as a predictor of stone-free status after flexible ureteroscopy with holmium laser lithotripsy: a single-center experience
.
Urology
.
2012 Sept
;
80
(
3
):
524
8
. .
17.
Mullerad
M
,
Aguinaga
JRA
,
Aro
T
,
Kastin
A
,
Goldin
O
,
Kravtsov
A
, et al.
Initial clinical experience with a modulated holmium laser pulse-moses technology: does it enhance laser lithotripsy efficacy?
Rambam Maimonides Med J
.
2017 Oct 16
;
8
(
4
). .
18.
Somani
BK
,
Desai
M
,
Traxer
O
,
Lahme
S
.
Stone-free rate (SFR): a new proposal for defining levels of SFR
.
Urolithiasis
.
2014 Apr
;
42
(
2
):
95
. .
19.
Mehta
RL
,
Kellum
JA
,
Shah
SV
,
Molitoris
BA
,
Ronco
C
,
Warnock
DG
, et al.
Acute kidney injury network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury
.
Crit Care
.
2007
;
11
(
2
):
R31
. .
20.
Turk
C
,
Petrik
A
,
Sarica
K
,
Seitz
C
,
Skolarikos
A
,
Straub
M
, et al.
EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis
.
Eur Urol
.
2016 Mar
;
69
(
3
):
475
82
.
21.
Ibrahim
A
,
Badaan
S
,
Elhilali
MM
,
Andonian
S
.
Moses technology in a stone simulator
.
Can Urol Assoc J
.
2018 Apr
;
12
(
4
):
127
30
. .
22.
Stern
KL
,
Monga
M
.
The Moses holmium system: time is money
.
Can J Urol
.
2018 Jun
;
25
(
3
):
9313
6
.
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.