| Title |
Lasers in clinical urology: state of the art and new horizons
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
World Journal of Urology, March 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00345-007-0163-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew J. Marks, Joel M. H. Teichman |
| Abstract |
We present an overview of current and emerging lasers for Urology. We begin with an overview of the Holmium:YAG laser. The Ho:YAG laser is the gold standard lithotripsy modality for endoscopic lithotripsy, and compares favorably to standard electrocautery transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Available laser technologies currently being studied include the frequency doubled double-pulse Nd:Yag (FREDDY) and high-powered potassium-titanyl-phosphate (KTP) lasers. The FREDDY laser presents an affordable and safe option for intracorporeal lithotripsy, but it does not fragment all stone compositions, and does not have soft tissue applications. The high power KTP laser shows promise in the ablative treatment of BPH. Initial experiments with the Erbium:YAG laser show it has improved efficiency of lithotripsy and more precise ablative and incisional properties compared to Ho:YAG, but the lack of adequate optical fibers limits its use in Urology. Thulium:YAG fiber lasers have also demonstrated tissue ablative and incision properties comparable to Ho:YAG. Lastly, compact size, portability, and low maintenance schedules of fiber lasers may allow them to shape the way lasers are used by urologists in the future. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 14 | 20% |
| Unknown | 15 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 47% |
| Engineering | 8 | 11% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 7 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 February 2024.
All research outputs
#7,451,584
of 22,780,967 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Urology
#856
of 2,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,136
of 76,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Urology
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,967 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,092 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 76,848 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.