ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07012941Updated Jun 10, 2025

Super-Pulsed Thulium Fiber Laser Versus Holmium:YAG Laser in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Upper Ureteral and Renal Stones

An interventional study of Superpulse Thulium Fiber laser (SPTFL) ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract stone or renal stone and Holmium: YAG laser ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract stone or renal stone in Ureterolithiasis and Renal Calculi, sponsored by Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 75 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-06-10.

Sponsored by Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
448
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 75 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The holmium laser is currently considered the gold standard for lithotripsy on urinary lithiasis, whereas the super-pulsed thulium fibre laser is a relatively new technology. Through a multi-center prospective randomised clinical study that mainly aims to explore the effectiveness and safety of a super-pulsed fibre thulium laser compared to a holmium laser in the treatment of upper ureteral and renal stones (10mm\<cumulative maximum diameter ≤ 25mm) in retrograde intrarenal surgery. The research participants are assigned randomly to undergo retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) either using a super-pulsed thulium fibre laser or a holmium-YAG laser with an allocation ratio of 1:1. The secondary aim of this study is to provide high-level evidence for the development of diagnostic and treatment guidelines in the field of urolithiasis, both domestically and internationally. The outcomes of the RIRS procedures are compared for the two treatment arms.

Read the detailed description

Endoscopic surgery is the predominant method for treating urinary tract stones. The field of surgery has progressed from traditional open procedures and percutaneous lithotripsy to more advanced techniques such as mini, micro, and ureteroscopy methods. RIRS, which stands for retrograde intrarenal surgery, is a therapeutic option for upper ureteric or renal stones that are less than 2cm. Although various energy systems have been employed for stone fragmentation during ureteroscopy, laser energy is the predominant method used for this purpose. Both domestic and foreign criteria recommend the holmium laser. The thermal effects of the Ho:YAG laser efficiently pulverise stones. As a result, it is currently the most widely used laser for conducting laser lithotripsy on stones in the urinary tract. Unfortunately, the holmium-YAG laser system has some intrinsic problems, such as different components having varying effects. 2. During the fragmentation process, the stone displacement is large and difficult to accurately control. 3. Some stones cannot be powdered, heat-damaged, or perforated. 4. Mucosal damage during fragmentation makes it easy to bleed and ooze. 5. The powdering efficiency is low, the fragmentation time is long, there is a lower energy conversion ratio, excessive heat generation in machines, noise, etc. Thus, clinical practice requires a new laser technology to overcome the holmium laser's limitations.

Thus, new laser systems are being created to fix the issue. The newest laser technology, super-pulsed thulium fiber laser (SPTFL), has promising results. A super-pulse fibre thulium laser is a pulsed fibre thulium laser that can be clinically used for lithotripsy. In 2005, in vitro experiments related to super-pulsed fibre thulium laser lithotripsy were first reported. Experimental data suggests that, compared with holmium laser, thulium laser has the following advantages in urinary tract stone lithotripsy: 1. TFL has higher lithotripsy efficiency, and the stone ablation speed is 1.5-4 times faster than that of Ho:YAG. 2. A safer lithotripsy with a 4-fold reduction in penetration depth and a limited temperature increase inside the cavity (up to 39 °C). 3. Lower costs: low maintenance costs, low fibre damage, low equipment volume (1/8), high energy conversion. Subsequently, an increasing number of in vitro experiments and clinical studies have been conducted internationally. However, there is a scarcity of studies in the literature that directly compare the effectiveness and stone free rates of the Holmium-YAG laser and SPTFL systems. Consequently, investigators are interested in conducting a formal multi-center prospective randomised clinical study to compare the two systems in RIRS.

02

Conditions studied

  • Ureterolithiasis
  • Renal Calculi

Keywords

  • Super pulse thulium fiber laser (SPTFL)
  • Ho:YAG laser
  • Lithotripsy
  • Ureteral Stone
  • Ureteroscopy
  • renal stone
03

In context

Ureterolithiasis

84 studies on the registry are indexed under Ureterolithiasis; 19 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 448 is above the median of 101 across 66 interventional studies indexed under Ureterolithiasis.

Browse Ureterolithiasis studies →

Lead sponsor

Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University is the lead sponsor of 483 studies on the registry; 283 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 75 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. 18 ≤ Age ≤ 75 years old, regardless of gender, able to tolerate surgery;
  2. Patients who have been confirmed by bilateral renal/urinary tract CT to have upper ureteral or renal stones, single or multiple, and are planning to undergo ureteroscopic lithotripsy for stone removal;
  3. Confirmed by bilateral renal/urinary tract CT, the cumulative maximum diameter of stones is 10mm\<cumulative maximum diameter ≤ 25mm;
  4. Those who voluntarily participate and sign an form.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Uncontrollable systemic hemorrhagic disease;
  2. Severe spinal deformities, severe hip joint deformities, and difficulty in lithotomy position;
  3. Uncontrolled urinary tract infections;
  4. Any intracavitary surgery caused by anatomical factors of the urinary system cannot be performed;
  5. Pregnant, planned pregnancy within 3 months, and lactating female patients;
  6. The patients determined by the investigator to be unsuitable for this study include (but are not limited to): known to have (HIV) or AIDS; Suffering from mental illness; Infectious diseases;
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

HIV

The human immunodeficiency virus, which weakens the immune system.

Many studies now accept people whose HIV is controlled on treatment, judged by the viral load and the CD4 count. Check the limits this study sets.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
448 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Superpulse Thulium Fiber laser (SPTFL)

    With the help of a Superpuled Thulium Fibre laser machine, the ureteral or renal stones that are going to be treated with the RIRS procedure are either fragmented or dusted as part of the procedure.

    Device: Superpulse Thulium Fiber laser (SPTFL) ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract stone or renal stone

  • Active comparator
    Holmium: YAG laser

    With the help of a Holmium fibre laser machine, the ureteral or renal stones that are going to be treated with the RIRS procedure are either fragmented or dusted as part of the procedure.

    Device: Holmium: YAG laser ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract stone or renal stone

Interventions

  • DeviceSuperpulse Thulium Fiber laser (SPTFL) ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract stone or renal stone

    RIRS procedure for upper ureteral or renal stone lithotripsy with Superpulsed Thulium Laser

  • DeviceHolmium: YAG laser ureteroscopy for treatment of upper urinary tract stone or renal stone

    RIRS procedure for upper ureteral or renal stone lithotripsy with Holmium: YAG Laser

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Stone-Free Rate at 4 Weeks Postoperative (Percentage of Participants)

    Urinary tract CT(Computed Tomography)scan at 4 weeks post-operative did not reveal residual stones or residual stones with a diameter ≤ 2 mm and no clinical symptoms were defined as stone clearance

    Time frame: 4 week post-operative

Secondary outcomes

  1. Intraoperative complication rate (Percentage of Participants)

    Includes ureteral or renal pelvis perforation, mucosal avulsion, ureteral rupture, conversion to other treatments, and success rate of ureteral access sheath insertion.

    Time frame: During the procedure

  2. Change in Hemoglobin from Baseline (g/dL)

    Hemoglobin measured before and within 24 hours after surgery

    Time frame: Within 24 hours postoperative

  3. Change in Serum Creatinine from Baseline (μmol/L)

    Serum creatinine measured before and within 24 hours after surgery

    Time frame: Within 24 hours postoperative

  4. Change in Blood Urea Nitrogen from Baseline (mmol/L)

    BUN measured before and within 24 hours after surgery

    Time frame: Within 24 hours postoperative

  5. Operative time (Minutes)

    Duration of operation

    Time frame: Decided immediately after the surgery

  6. Lithotripsy time (Minutes)

    Time spent performing laser lithotripsy

    Time frame: intra-operation

  7. Length of Hospital Stay (Days)

    Total number of days the participant is hospitalized for the surgical procedure, from the day of surgery until discharge

    Time frame: up to 30 days

  8. Total hospitalization costs

    Total cost incurred during the participant's hospital stay for the surgical procedure, including all procedural and inpatient care charges

    Time frame: Up to 3 months

  9. Postoperative Complications (Clavien-Dindo Classification, Percentage of Participants)

    Postoperative complications, Recording data according to the Clavien-Dindo classification such as infection, pain, ureteral stricture and other complications that result in the need for intervention or readmission or surgical revision following the RIRS procedure.

    Time frame: Up to 30 days post-operative

  10. Number of Additional Staged Procedures (Count per Participant)

    Number of additional surgical procedures required due to incomplete stone clearance, based on imaging findings at the 4-week follow-up after the initial RIRS procedure

    Time frame: Up to 3 months post-operation

07

Study locations

1 site
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Wang W, Fan J, Huang G, Li J, Zhu X, Tian Y, Su L. Prevalence of kidney stones in mainland China: A systematic review. Sci Rep. 2017 Jan 31;7:41630. doi: 10.1038/srep41630. PubMed 28139722 ↗
  • Khan SR, Pearle MS, Robertson WG, Gambaro G, Canales BK, Doizi S, Traxer O, Tiselius HG. Kidney stones. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016 Feb 25;2:16008. doi: 10.1038/nrdp.2016.8. PubMed 27188687 ↗
  • Fried NM, Irby PB. Advances in laser technology and fibre-optic delivery systems in lithotripsy. Nat Rev Urol. 2018 Sep;15(9):563-573. doi: 10.1038/s41585-018-0035-8. PubMed 29884804 ↗
  • Teichmann HO, Herrmann TR, Bach T. Technical aspects of lasers in urology. World J Urol. 2007 Jun;25(3):221-5. doi: 10.1007/s00345-007-0184-5. Epub 2007 May 30. PubMed 17534625 ↗
  • Emiliani E, Kanashiro A, Angerri O. Lasers for stone lithotripsy: advantages/disadvantages of each laser source. Curr Opin Urol. 2023 Jul 1;33(4):302-307. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000001092. Epub 2023 Mar 17. PubMed 36927702 ↗
  • Traxer O, Keller EX. Thulium fiber laser: the new player for kidney stone treatment? A comparison with Holmium:YAG laser. World J Urol. 2020 Aug;38(8):1883-1894. doi: 10.1007/s00345-019-02654-5. Epub 2019 Feb 6. PubMed 30729311 ↗
  • Hale GM, Querry MR. Optical Constants of Water in the 200-nm to 200-microm Wavelength Region. Appl Opt. 1973 Mar 1;12(3):555-63. doi: 10.1364/AO.12.000555. PubMed 20125343 ↗
  • Ventimiglia E, Doizi S, Kovalenko A, Andreeva V, Traxer O. Effect of temporal pulse shape on urinary stone phantom retropulsion rate and ablation efficiency using holmium:YAG and super-pulse thulium fibre lasers. BJU Int. 2020 Jul;126(1):159-167. doi: 10.1111/bju.15079. Epub 2020 May 18. PubMed 32277557 ↗
  • Solano C, Corrales M, Panthier F, Candela L, Doizi S, Traxer O. Navigating urolithiasis treatment: assessing the practicality and performance of thulium fiber laser, holmium YAG, and thulium YAG in real-world scenarios. World J Urol. 2023 Oct;41(10):2627-2636. doi: 10.1007/s00345-023-04487-9. Epub 2023 Jul 20. PubMed 37468656 ↗
  • Dorantes-Carrillo LA, Basulto-Martinez M, Suarez-Ibarrola R, Heinze A, Proietti S, Flores-Tapia JP, Esqueda-Mendoza A, Giusti G. Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Versus Miniaturized Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Kidney Stones >1cm: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials. Eur Urol Focus. 2022 Jan;8(1):259-270. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2021.02.008. Epub 2021 Feb 21. PubMed 33627307 ↗
  • Jiao B, Luo Z, Xu X, Zhang M, Zhang G. Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in surgical management of upper urinary stones - A systematic review with meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2019 Nov;71:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.09.005. Epub 2019 Sep 12. PubMed 31521837 ↗
  • Li Z, Lai C, Shah AK, Xie W, Liu C, Huang L, Li K, Yu H, Xu K. Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm). BMC Urol. 2020 Mar 16;20(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s12894-020-00586-6. PubMed 32178654 ↗
  • Martov AG, Ergakov DV, Guseynov M, Andronov AS, Plekhanova OA. Clinical Comparison of Super Pulse Thulium Fiber Laser and High-Power Holmium Laser for Ureteral Stone Management. J Endourol. 2021 Jun;35(6):795-800. doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0581. Epub 2021 Jan 13. PubMed 33238763 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Start is estimated for Jul 2025; primary completion for Feb 2027, 19 months later.

Of 36 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Ureterolithiasis, half reached primary completion within 19 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 30. This study's planned 19 months is close to that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 38 studies reached it within 20 months; a quarter within 11 and three quarters within 30.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
May 20, 2025
First posted
Jun 10, 2025
StartEst.
Jul 1, 2025
Primary completionEst.
Feb 28, 2027
CompletionEst.
Mar 20, 2027
Last update
Jun 10, 2025
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 10, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07012941
Collaborators
RenJi Hospital, Tongji Hospital, West China Hospital, Shanghai General Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Beijing Tsinghua Changgeng Hospital, People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Peking University Shenzhen Hospital, Shenzhen People's Hospital
Responsible party
Xu Kewei (Kewei Xu, MD, Ph.D, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 10, 2025
Start date
Jul 1, 2025 (estimated)
Primary completion
Feb 28, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 20, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 10, 2025

Study contacts

Kewei Xu, MD, PhD
Contact
xukewei@mail.sysu.edu.cn
+86-13632331628
Kewei Xu, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital of Sun Yat-Sen University

Oversight

FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jun 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion