Evaluates laser lithotripsy performance using artificial stones, indicating training advantages.
Introduction: Simulation has become central in flexible ureteroscopy training and research; however, the lack of standardized and reproducible models limits objective performance assessment. We aimed to evaluate the reliability and reproducibility of laser lithotripsy using morphology-specific artificial stones (AS) within a standardized ex vivo platform and to assess whether the model could detect operator-dependent differences in lithotripsy performance. Methods: This study was conducted using AS derived from 3D-printed images of human kidney stones. Six stone volume categories (F1–F6; 250–1750 mm³) were reproduced using BegoStone ® mixture with ratio of 15:4. Novice and expert surgeons performed in vitro laser lithotripsy under standardized settings. Performance metrics included ablation efficiency (AE) (mm³/J), energy consumption (J/mm³), lasing time consumption (s/mm³), and laser ablation rate (AR) (mm³/min). Results were compared with six matched in vivo reference cases. Adjusted linear models were used to evaluate the effect of operator experience. Results: In vivo lithotripsy showed a mean laser-on time of 44.9 ± 17.0 minutes, total energy delivery of 32.35 ± 12.2 kJ, AE of 0.03 ± 0.00 mm³/J, and laser AR of 21.9 ± 1.78 mm³/min, with complete stone clearance in all cases. AS experiments demonstrated shorter laser-on-time than in vivo procedures (37.4–38.3 vs 44.9 minutes, p < 0.01), lower energy delivery (26.9–27.9 vs 32.35 kJ, p < 0.01), higher AE (0.04 vs 0.03 mm³/J, p < 0.01), and higher laser AR (26.0–26.8 vs 21.9 mm³/min, p < 0.01). In unadjusted aggregated comparison, expert surgeons showed higher performances than novices, although the differences did not reach statistical significance ( p > 0.05). Adjusted analysis showed that operator experience was significantly associated with both better AE and AR ( p < 0.01). Conclusion: The standardized ex vivo platform, combining a validated simulation model with 3D-printed morphology-specific AS, provides a reliable and reproducible environment for evaluating laser lithotripsy performance, supporting the objective metrics assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zorzi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: