Back to Authors

Shah, Ojas

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2744-8812

A5039122651 | I2799503643

Mayo Clinic

Columbia University Irving Medical Center

Citations 9

Prospective randomised double‐blind trial: holmium laser lithotripsy with vs without Moses™ 2.0

BJU International | September 14, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1111/bju.70446 | PMID 42733216

Objective To assess the effect of Moses™ 2.0 (Lumenis Be Ltd., Yokneam Illit, Israel; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) for lithotripsy of renal stones of 8–20 mm in diameter on operative time, surgeon workload, and retropulsion. Subjects/Patients and Methods In our multicentre, randomised, double‐blind clinical trial, patients were randomised 1:1 to standard or Moses 2.0 laser lithotripsy and stratified by stone size. Patients and surgeons were blinded to laser modality. Primary outcomes were total operative time as well as surgeon workload assessed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration‐Task Load Index (NASA‐TLX). Secondary outcomes were stone retropulsion evaluated by blinded video review and postoperative clinical outcomes. Linear regression modelling was used for analysis. Results A total of 153 patients (79 Standard, 74 Moses 2.0) with similar clinical, stone, and operative characteristics were evaluated. There was no significant difference in operative times between the Standard and Moses 2.0 groups ( P = 0.73). Moses 2.0 was associated with lower effort, frustration, mental, physical, and temporal workload, as well as higher rated overall performance compared to the standard laser. Video review demonstrated no difference in rates of retropulsion ( P = 0.13). Complication rates (Standard: 13%; Moses 2.0: 10%) and stone‐free rates (Standard: 51%; Moses: 2.0 55%) were comparable. Conclusion Our study evaluated the impact of Moses 2.0 technology on high‐powered renal stone dusting, constituting the largest double‐blind trial of its kind to date. There was insufficient evidence to suggest any difference in operative times or clinical outcomes when using Moses 2.0 compared to standard laser lithotripsy. Moses 2.0 was associated with reduced surgeon workload, which has implicit impact on surgeon wellness.
Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score Is a Better Predictor of Septic Shock After Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Secondary Analysis of Two Multicenter Prospective Trials

Journal of Endourology | June 9, 2023 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 8 | Pages: 863-867

10.1089/end.2022.0677 | PMID 37294208

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Preoperative Prophylactic Antibiotics for Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Moderate to High Infectious Risk Population: A Report from the EDGE Consortium

Journal of Urology | December 28, 2020 | Volume: 205 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1379-1386

10.1097/ju.0000000000001582 | PMID 33369488

A Decision Analysis of Observation vs Immediate Reintervention for Asymptomatic Residual Fragments Less than 4 mm Following Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy

Urology Practice | February 4, 2019 | Volume: 6 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 294-299

10.1097/upj.0000000000000038 | PMID 37317352

Dusting versus Basketing during Ureteroscopy–Which Technique is More Efficacious? A Prospective Multicenter Trial from the EDGE Research Consortium

Journal of Urology | December 15, 2017 | Volume: 199 | Issue: 5 | Pages: 1272-1276

10.1016/j.juro.2017.11.126 | PMID 29253579

Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy: A Review of Dusting vs Fragmentation with Extraction

Journal of Endourology | October 24, 2017 | Volume: 32 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 1-6

10.1089/end.2017.0641 | PMID 29061070

A Multicenter Comparison of the Safety and Effectiveness of Ureteroscopic Laser Lithotripsy in Obese and Normal Weight Patients

Journal of Endourology | March 22, 2013 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 710-714

10.1089/end.2012.0605 | PMID 23521213

Predictive Value of Current Imaging Modalities for the Detection of Urolithiasis During Pregnancy: a Multicenter, Longitudinal Study

Journal of Urology | September 24, 2012 | Volume: 189 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 931-934

10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.076 | PMID 23017526

Obstetric Complications of Ureteroscopy During Pregnancy

Journal of Urology | May 15, 2012 | Volume: 188 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 151-154

10.1016/j.juro.2012.02.2566 | PMID 22591961