RESUMO
Background: Lithotripsy with holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser is the current gold standard for treating stones of the upper urinary tract (UUT). The recently introduced thulium fiber laser (TFL) has the potential to be more efficient and as safe as Ho:YAG. Objective: To compare the performance and complications between Ho:YAG and TFL for UUT lithotripsy. Design setting and participants: This was a prospective single-center study of 182 patients treated between February 2021 and February 2022. In a consecutive approach, laser lithotripsy was performed via ureteroscopy with Ho:YAG for 5 mo, and then with TFL for 5 mo. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Our primary outcome was stone-free (SF) status at 3 mo after ureteroscopy with Ho:YAG versus TFL lithotripsy. Secondary outcomes were complication rates and results regarding the cumulative stone size. Patients were followed at 3 mo with abdominal imaging (ultrasound or computed tomography). Results and limitations: The study cohort comprised 76 patients treated with Ho:YAG laser and 100 patients treated with TFL. Cumulative stone size was significantly higher in the TFL than in the Ho:YAG group (20.4 vs 14.8 mm; p = 0.01). SF status was similar in both groups (68.4% vs 72%; p = 0.06). Complication rates were comparable. In subgroup analysis, the SF rate was significantly higher (81.6% vs 62.5%; p = 0.04) and the operative time was shorter for stones measuring 1-2 cm, whereas the results were similar for stones <1 cm and >2 cm. The lack of randomization and single-center design are the main limitations of the study. Conclusions: TFL and Ho:YAG lithotripsy are comparable in terms of the SF rate and safety for the treatment of UUT lithiasis. According to our study, for a cumulative stone size of 1-2 cm, TFL is more effective than Ho:YAG. Patient summary: We compared the efficiency and safety of two laser types for the treatment of stones in the upper urinary tract. We found that stone-free status at 3 months did not significantly differ between the holmium and thulium lasers.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Near-peer tutoring appears to be an efficient approach for teaching clinical skills. However, the clinical experience gained in the form of student medical internships may offset any interest in such tutoring programme. We then investigated the long-term benefits of this programme. METHODS: This study was conducted in a medical school that experimented in near-peer tutoring for semiology intended for undergraduate medical students. Objective Structured Clinical Examinations and a written semiology test were used to assess students' clinical skills immediately on its conclusion and repeated one and 2 years after the tutoring was completed. RESULTS: 116 students were evaluated initially (80 tutored and 36 untutored), 38 at 1 year (16 tutored and 22 untutored), 42 at 2 years (21 tutored and 21 untutored). In the global score for Objective Structured Clinical Examinations: at 1 year, the tutored group scored 14.0 ± 1.05 and the untutored group scored 11.3 ± 2.3 (p < 0.001), at 2 years, the tutored group scored 15.1 ± 1.5 and the untutored group scored 12.4 ± 2.2 (p < 0.001). We found a similar but smaller difference for the written semiology test. The difference for Objective Structured Clinical Examinations between tutored and untutored students vanished over time for cross-cutting skills. CONCLUSIONS: Near-peer tutoring in semiology for undergraduate medical students led to better results that remained with the passing of time. Though internships do allow an improvement in the clinical skills of untutored students, they did not reach the level of tutored students.