Effect of modification of shock-wave delivery on stone fragmentation

Current Opinion in Urology

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 83-87

  Talic, Riyadh F ^a   Rabah, Danny M ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy; Shock wave lithotripsy; Shock wave rate urolithiasis

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL TRIAL; DEVICE; EXTRACORPOREAL LITHOTRIPSY; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; KIDNEY INJURY; LITHOTRIPTOR; NONHUMAN; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SHOCK WAVE; TECHNIQUE; TECHNOLOGY; TREATMENT INDICATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UROLITHIASIS; LITHOTRIPSY; METHODOLOGY;

CLINICAL TRIALS; HUMANS; LITHOTRIPSY; URINARY CALCULI;

EID: 33744989299     PISSN: 09630643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mou.0000193374.29942.46     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Talic RF, El-Faqih SR. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for lower pole nephrolithiasis: efficacy and variables that influence treatment outcome. Urology 1998; 51:544-547.
2. Drach GW, Dretler S, Fair W, et al. Report of the United States cooperative study of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 1986; 135:1127-1133.
3. Chaussy C, Schmiedt E. Shockwave treatment for stone in the upper urinary tract. Urol Clin North Am 1983; 10:743-750.
4. Lingeman JE. Stone treatment: current trends and future possibilities. J Urol 2004; 172:1774.
5. Lingeman JE, Kim SC, Kuo RL, et al. Shockwave lithotripsy: anecdotes and insights. J Endourol 2003; 17:687-693.
6. Dhar N, Thornton J, Karafa MT, Streem SB. A multivariate analysis of risk factors associated with subcapsular hematoma formation following electromagnetic shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 2004; 172:2271-2274.
7. Kouriefs C, Quatan N, Larking A, et al. What is important to patients receiving extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for urinary tract calculi? Ann R Col Surg Engl 2004; 86:432-435.
8. Putman SS, Hamilton BD, Johnson DB. The use of shockwave lithotripsy for renal calculi. Curr Opin Urol 2004; 14:117-121.
9. Abdel-Khalek M, Sheir KZ, Mokhtar AA, et al. Prediction of success rate after extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy of renal stones - a multivariate analysis model. Scand J Urol Nephrol 2004; 38:161-167.
10. Zhou Y, Cocks FH, Preminger GM, Zhong P. Innovation in shock wave lithotripsy technology: updates and experimental studies. J Urol 2004; 172:1892-1898. An excellent paper that updates the basic concepts involved in stone fragmentation and describes a new upgrade utilizing the concept of sequential twin-head shock-wave generation.
11. Lokhandwalla M, Sturtevant B. Fracture mechanics model of stone comminution in ESWL and implications for tissue damage. Phys Med Biol 2000; 45:1923-1940.
12. Sass W, Braunlich W, Dreyer HP, et al. The mechanisms of stone disintegration by shock waves. Ultrasound Med Biol 1991; 17:239-243.
13. Zhu S, Cocks FH, Preminger GM, Zhong P. The role of stress waves and cavitation in stone comminution in shock wave lithotripsy. Ultrasound Med Biol 2002; 28:661-671.
14. Crum LA. Cavitation microjets as a contributory mechanism for renal calculi disintegration in ESWL. J Urol 1988; 140:1587-1590.
15. Weir MJ, Tariq N, Honey RJ. Shockwave frequency affects fragmentation in a kidney stone model. J Endourol 2000; 14:547-550.
16. Huber P, Jochle K, Debus J. Influence of shock wave pressure amplitude and pulse repetition frequency on the lifespan, size and number of transient cavities in the field of an electromagnetic lithotripter. Phys Med Biol 1998; 43:3113-3128.
17. Zeman RK, Davros WJ, Garra BS, Hori-i SC. Cavitation effects during lithotripsy. Part I. Results of in vitro experiments. Radiology 1990; 177:157-161.
18. Wiksell H, Kinn AC. Implications of cavitation phenomena for shot intervals in extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. Br J Urol 1995; 75:720-723.
19. Greenstein A, Matzkin H. Does the rate of extracorporeal shock wave delivery affect tone fragmentation? Urology 1999; 54:430-432.
20. Vallancien G, Munoz R, Borghi M, et al. Relationship between the frequency of piezoelectric shock waves and the quality of renal stone fragmentation. In vitro study and clinical implications. Eur Urol 1989; 16:41-44.
21. Paterson RF, Lifshitz DA, Lingeman JE, et al. Stone fragmentation during shock wave lithotripsy is improved by slowing the shock wave rate: studies with a new animal model. J Urol 2002; 168:2211-2215.
22. Robert M, Rakotomalala E, Delbros O, Navratil H. Piezoelectric lithotripsy of urethral stones: influence of shockwave frequency on sedation and therapeutic efficiency. J Endourol 1999; 13:157-160.
23. Madbouly K, El-Tiraifi A, Seida M, et al. Slow compared with fast shock wave lithotripsy rate for urolithiasis: a prospective randomized study. J Urol 2005; 173:127-130. The first clinical paper to document the beneficial effect of slow shock-wave rate on stone-free rates in patients with renal and ureteric stones.
24. Pace KT, Ghiculete D, Harju M, et al. Shockwave lithotripsy at 60 or 120 shocks per minute: randomized, double-blind trial. J Urol 2005; 174:595-599.
25. Sheir KZ, El-Sheikh AM, Ghoneim MA. Synchronous twin-pulse technique to improve efficacy of SWL: preliminary results of an experimental study. Endourol 2001; 15:965-974.
26. Sheir KZ, Lee D, Humphrey PA, et al. Evaluation of synchronous twin pulse technique for shock wave lithotripsy: in vivo tissue effects. Urology 2003; 62:964-967.
27. Sheir KZ, El-Diasty TA, Ismail AM. Evaluation of a synchronous twin-pulse technique for shock wave lithotripsy: the first prospective clinical study. BJU Int 2005; 95:389-393.
28. Zhong P, Cocks FH, Cioanta I, Preminger GM. Controlled, forced collapse of cavitation bubbles for improved stone fragmentation during shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 1997; 158:2323-2328.
29. Zhou Y, Cocks FH, Preminger GM, Zhong P. The effect of treatment strategy on stone comminution efficiency in shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 2004; 172:349-354. This in-vitro study evaluates the use of dose escalation in improving stone comminution.
30. Cleveland RO, Angelade R, Babayan RK. Effect of stone motion on in vitro comminution efficiency of Storz modulith SLX. J Endourol 2004; 18:629-633.
31. Sorensen C, Chandhoke P, Moore M, et al. Comparison of intravenous sedation compared with general anesthesia on the efficacy of the Doli 50 lithotripter. J Urol 2002; 168:35-37.
32. Eichel L, Batzold P, Erturk E. Operator experience and adequate anesthesia improve treatment outcome with third-generation lithotripters. J Endourol 2001; 15:671-673.
33. Akers SR, Cocks FH, Weinerth JL. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: the use of chemical treatments for improved stone comminution. J Urol 1987; 138:1295-1300.
34. Heimbach D, Kourambas J, Zhong P, et al. The use of chemical treatments for improved comminution of artificial stones. J Urol 2004; 171:1797-1801. This paper describes promising early work of changing the urine chemical environment at time of SWL to improve stone-free rates.
35. Cass AS. Renal function after bilateral extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy. J Endourol 1994; 8:395-399.
36. Pienkny AJ, Streem SB. Simultaneous compared with staged bilateral extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: long-term effect on renal function. J Urol 1999; 162:1591-1593.
37. Perry KT, Smith ND, Weiser AC, et al. The efficacy and safety of synchronous bilateral extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 2000; 164:644-647.