AzTrials
AzTrials

Kidney StoneNCT04997668

Clinical Outcomes and Healthcare Economics of SOLTIVE Compared to Ho:YAG Laser in Urolithiasis

A study testing SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser and Ho:YAG Laser in people with Kidney Stone, run by University of Kansas Medical Center at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

To compare intraoperative as well as postoperative outcomes of SOLTIVE Thulium laser compared to Ho:YAG laser for the treatment of urolithiasis. The hypothesis is that utilizing the SOLTIVE Thulium laser for the treatment of urolithiasis will result in a more efficient procedure, with comparable stone free rate to… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Kidney Stone
What is being tested?
SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser and Ho:YAG Laser
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
100 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
1 Sep 2022to 25 Mar 2026
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Patients must be 18 years of age or older
  • Patients must be diagnosed with single stone burden <2.0 cm
  • Patients must opt for definitive treatment with ureteroscopy with lase lithotripsy and stone basket extraction

Who cannot join

  • Patients with multiple stones or stones bilaterally
  • Patient with stones >2.0cm
  • Patient who wish to continue with trial of passage

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • University of Kansas Medical Center

    Kansas City, Kansas, 66160

Other trials in United States

About this study

To compare intraoperative as well as postoperative outcomes of SOLTIVE Thulium laser compared to Ho:YAG laser for the treatment of urolithiasis.

The hypothesis is that utilizing the SOLTIVE Thulium laser for the treatment of urolithiasis will result in a more efficient procedure, with comparable stone free rate to that of Holmium laser and subjective improvement in physician satisfaction.

Read the detailed description

Urologists utilize several different laser technologies which continue to rapidly advance and improve. The Holmium:YAG laser (Hm:YAG), Thulium:YAG (Tm:YAG) laser and most recently, the thulium fiber are essential tools used in endourology. The holmium:YAG laser fiber is a 2120nm which has been the primary workhorse for many endoscopic procedures as it is broadly available with many versions and upgrades. The thulium:YAG laser has also shown its own set of advantages such as being lighter weight, having high frequency capability, generating less degradation, and consuming less energy.

The natural progression of lasers has continued with the development of the thulium fiber laser (TFL), which is a distinct technology from the previous Thulium:YAG lasers. This remains an important separation as prior studies with Tm:YAG the cannot be directly applied to this new technology. TFL's have a wavelength of 1940nm, different from the Hm:YAG laser of 2120nm and Tm:YAG at 2010nm, which is absorbed nearly five times more in water further allowing for improved efficiency and has less penetration of a depth of 0.15mm. In preclinical studies, the TFL demonstrated two to threefold higher comparison to holmium:YAG as well as four times less retropulsion.

The thulium fiber laser has been studied and applied in several different Urological procedures and the initial clinical data on these has been promising. Based on the temporal pulse shape, the TFL resulted in a two-fold ablation power in comparison to holmium as well as greater versitility. More specifically, the TFL has been effective in several studies during laser lithotripsy. In a comparison study of the TFL and high-powered holmium laser in ureteral stones, the procedures were faster, required fewer stents and no residual stones were seen at 30 days.

Specifically, Olympus's super-pulsed SOLTIVE thulium laser fiber was FDA approved for use in numerous urological indications including lithotripsy. This SOLTIVE thulium laser fiber is a super pulsed laser with numerous benefits including high frequency capabilities of 2,200 Hertz (Hz) compared to Ho:YAG capabilities of 80-100 Hz, decreased fiber degradation, continuous laser mode resulting in smoother cut, shallower tissue penetration (0.15 mm) which results in less surrounding tissue damage, 50 mm diameter laser fiber versus 200 mm allowing for increased maneuverability, visibility, and decreased energy consumption. The SOLTIVE laser allows for greater power through a smaller fiber decreasing fiber failure and endoscope damage. This greater tissue ablation capacity also results in improved hemostasis if identified during endoscopy. Finally, this laser is much smaller and compact in size in comparison to Holium lasers. It allows for a less crowded operating room and has the ability to be utilized in any operating room outlet in comparison to the 220 Volt outlet required by Holium.

In addition, as the prevalence of stones continues to rise, the economic burden of stone disease is also increasing. Despite this upward trend, there are very few studies that have looked at this economic impact of specific stone treatments based on particular laser subtypes. Perez-Ardavin et al looked at comparison between extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for stones smaller than 2cm which showed higher cost and increased perceived affection. The TFL may address some of this disparity with improved efficacy, less OR time and potential reduced need for ureteral stenting. Furthermore, the TFL may lead to decreased patient costs and allow for more procedures to be completed in turn providing benefit to both patients and hospitals.

Despite the favorable data and qualities in other TFL studies, there remains an insufficient data on clinical performance of the SOLTIVE Thulium laser fibers for treatment of urolithiasis, particularly in the United States. Additionally, there has been limited comparison of economic utility of the TFL to the widely utilized holmium laser fibers.

Conditions
Kidney Stone
Being tested
SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser, Ho:YAG Laser
Medical subject headings
Kidney Calculi

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber LaserDevice

    Patients randomized to Arm A will undergo surgery to remove their kidney stone with FDA approved SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser.

  • Ho:YAG LaserDevice

    Patients randomized to Arm B will undergo surgery to remove their kidney stone with FDA approved Ho:YAG laser.

Study groups in NCT04997668
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber LaserActive comparatorSOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser group (laser A)
Receives: Device: SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser
Ho:YAG LaserActive comparatorHo:YAG Laser group (laser B)
Receives: Device: Ho:YAG Laser

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. To evaluate the stone free rate of patients undergoing ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy for urolithiasis at first follow up visit

    To evaluate the stone free rate of patients undergoing ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy for urolithiasis with the SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser in comparison to Ho:YAG laser with repeat imaging at the first follow up clinic visit.

    Measured: 6 months

Secondary outcomes (11)
  1. To compare Operation time SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare intraoperative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to total operative time, during surgery.

    Measure the difference in time compared among the two groups. Looking at which approach has a shorter operation time. Unit will be minute differences between two groups

    Measured: 1 day

  2. To compare laser time SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare intraoperative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to total laser time during surgery. Comparing the two groups to see which laser used has less laser time. Unit will be minute differences between two groups

    Measured: 1 day

  3. To compare pedal time SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare intraoperative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to pedal time during surgery.

    Comparing the two groups to see which laser used has less pedal time. Unit will be minute differences between two groups

    Measured: 1 day

  4. To compare laser setting SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare intraoperative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to laser setting during surgery. Laser setting will be a descriptive measure between the two groups.

    Measured: 1 day

  5. To compare use of basket during SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare intraoperative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to use of basketing and how many times the basket was inserted for fragments removal and dusting compared to fragmentation time.

    Measure of unit it will be a count difference between the two groups.

    Measured: 1 day

  6. To compare post-operative complications of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare post-operative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to complications.

    Measure will be rate of complication in percentage.

    Measured: 6 months

  7. To compare post-operative physician satisfaction with retropulsion of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare post-operative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to physician satisfaction with retropulsion with a measurement tool (questionnaire) that will be used to assess this outcome. The questionnaire will have a satisfaction scale (1-5).

    Measured: 6 months

  8. To compare post-operative physician satisfaction of endoscopic view of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare post-operative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to physician satisfaction with endoscopic views with a measurement tool (questionnaire) that will be used to assess this outcome. The questionnaire will have a satisfaction scale (1-5).

    Measured: 6 months

  9. To compare post-operative fiber degradation of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare post-operative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to fiber degradation with provider feedback. This will be measured in a Yes/No format. The measurement will be a count of each group that had fiber degradation.

    Measured: 6 months

  10. To compare post-operative stent placement of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare post-operative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to stent placement with provider feedback. This will be measured in a Yes/No format. The measurement will be a count of each group that had stent placed.

    Measured: 6 months

  11. To compare post-operative repeat procedure after SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser.

    To compare post-operative components of SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser vs Ho:YAG Laser in regard to if patient had a repeat procedure. This will be measured in a Yes/No format. The measurement will be a count of each group that had stent placed.

    Measured: 6 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted10 Aug 2021
  2. Study start1 Sep 2022
  3. Primary completion26 Mar 2025
  4. Study completion25 Mar 2026

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
100 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04997668
Sponsor's protocol ID
GU-EN-SS-01
Status last verified
May 2026
First submitted
16 Jul 2021
Last updated
7 May 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing SOLTIVE Thulium Fiber Laser and Ho:YAG Laser in people with Kidney Stone, run by University of Kansas Medical Center at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

To evaluate the stone free rate of patients undergoing ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy for urolithiasis at first follow up visit (time frame: 6 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 May 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in